Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

          Introduction to Romans(To put the passage in its literary and Historic
   setting)
    
    
    The book of Romans is the longest letter  written by Paul and it has few
    literary issues. There is no dispute about authorship or dating.  It was
    written between 54 and 58 from Corinth.  The Roman church was a strong
    Christian church which Paul had not founded and never visited.  Paul
    planned to visit Jerusalem, present the collection funds, and then proceed
    to  Rome on the way to Spain.  

    The purpose of the letter is not universally agreed:  it seems likely that
    it was intended as a letter of introduction from Paul to the Romans
    soliciting support for his missionary activities in Spain and elsewhere. 
    The letter carefully states Paul's theology of Christ.  Almost the entire
    letter is theological in nature, with little personal or historic 
    information.  The two literary issues with the letter is that the concluding
    chapter 16 may not have been part of the  original letter and 16:25-27 may
    be an additional fragment
    
    
   Romans 5 18-21  (Third Section of Romans Five)  NSRV
   
   
Therefore just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all
   one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.
   
For just as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, 
   by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous.  
   
But law came in, with the result that the trespass multiplied; 
   but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 
   
so that, just as sin exercised dominion in death, 
   grace might also exercise dominion through justification leading to eternal
   life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
======================================

   The Exegisis I did last May was specifically on Romans 5 18-21
   
   I will start with that section relating it to the rest of Romans 5 and to
   Romans as a whole.  I do make some comparisons between Romans, Corinthians,
   and Philipians.   These are four of the Epistles for which there is almost
   Universal Agreement that they were written by Paul.
   
                        Patricia
   
    
    Actually there are verses within Romans that justify the doctrine of
    Predestination.  God will choose who he will and only those whom he
    chooses for salvation are offered the free gift.  So we have at least
    three possibilities for meaning.
    
    1.  God chooses some for Salvation.  To them is given the free Gift of
    salvation.  There is no human freedom.  To some is offered.  Those
    offered accept.
    
    2.  God chooses all to offer salvation.  Some accept.  Some refuse to
    accept.  
    
    3.  God Chooses all to offer salvation.  Some accept immediately.  Some
    take much longer to accept.  All ultimately accept the free gift.
    
    
    Are there other alternatives?
    
    Does anyone in here agree with the first alternative?
    Anyone else in here agee with the third alternative?
    
    
================================================================================
Note 656.25                         Romans 5                            25 of 52
POWDML::FLANAGAN "I feel therefore I am"             46 lines  12-JAN-1995 13:18
                     -< Define assumptions and Motivation >-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    
    
    
    
    (As a good Feminist Theologian I start by defining my Assumptions and
    Motivation)
    
     I choose the text Romans 5: 18-21 because it supports Channings belief in
     God's goodness to all women, men and children and supports Universal
     salvation of every person. In this verses Paul clearly states that
     just as all men are condemned by the disobedience of Adam, so also all
     men are saved by the obedience of Christ.  Sin is separation from God. It
     is alienation, isolation, and lack of real connectedness to God and
     other human beings.  It is our human attempt to find meaning in our own
     secular existence without reference to a power outside of ourselves. 
     In good times this might appear to work, but eventually all humans
     confront situations of grief, loss, death, mortality, addiction,
     compulsive behaviors in which life becomes meaningless without a
     spiritual connection.  As humans each of us has little control over the
     essential elements of our lives.  We do not control when we are born or
     when we die, whether we are healthy or ill.  We do not control who our
     parents are, what culture and sociological environment we are born into.
     We have little control over our relationships, our addictions, our losses:
     without a spiritual connectedness our lives are meaningless.  We accept
     God's grace when we recognize that a power greater than ourselves can 
    restore us to sanity and we are entirely willing to allow this power to
     restore meaning

.    From there recovery(salvation) is possible through a heeling higher power
    (Grace).  The power of Christ(The incarnation of Goddess/God in human
    relationships) is central to this conversion process.  
    
     Those who accept Goddess/God into their lives, display an ability to love
     their neighbors as themselves.  This allows them to be instruments of God
     in bringing recovery to those who are separated.  No human can be fully
     human without the love of other humans.  The Christ principle is the 
    spirit of love within humanity.  The first time a counselor, a pastor, a
     sponsor, or a friend, reach out to a addicted person, the miracle of love
     has an opportunity to begin its work.  These are the moderns terms that I
     use to comprehend Paul and to comprehend Romans 5:18-21.   Christ is God's
     power incarnate in humanity, Grace is the gift of God's love, displayed in 
    unselfish human love.  Sin is our human attempt to find meaning separate
     from God and separate from loving communities.  Universal Salvation means
     that God's love is available here on earth to every man, woman, and child.

Exegesis
    
    My passage is part of the first half of the letter(Chapters 1-8) where
    Paul's theology is carefully stated. 
    
    Literary Style. 
    
    The literary style of this passage itself and this passage as a part of
    Romans 5 is striking  and powerful. Chapter five is divided into three
    major sections each starting with the word "Therefore".  
    
     1-11 discuss the theme of Justification, 
    12-17 sets up the Adam, Christ analogy, and
    18-21 restates the Adam, Christ analogy.   
    
    Each of the four verses of the passage contain a tight parallel  structure.
    Verses 18, 19, and 21 use the words "just as" and "so" as separators.
    Verses 18 and 19 contrast  the disobedience or sinfulness of Adam to
    the obedience or righteousness of Christ. 
    
    Therefore just as one  man's trespass led to condemnation for all 
    	so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life
    
    For just as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners,
    	so by  the one  man's obedience the many will be made righteous.
    
    Verse 21 uses a similar   "just as" "so"  structure  to contrast
    	between sin leading to death and grace leading to life.
     
    Just as sin exercised dominion in death,  
    so grace might also exercise dominion through justification leading to
      eternal life through Jesus  Christ our Lord 
    
    Verse 20 uses the connectors "But" and "but where"  to show the
    relationship of law to  trespass and sin to grace. 
    
    But law came in, with the result that the trespass multiplied;
    but where sin  increased, grace abounded all the more,
    
    
    Theological Interpretation.
    
     Theologically, this passage infers two 
    points that are critical to Unitarian Universalism.  One, that every
    human is saved, and two, that Christ is  fully human. This passage
    infers these two points through its tight parallelism.  The words "for
    all" are  very clear.  All men are made sinners through one man's act
    of Disobedience and all men are justified  through one man's act of
    obedience.  Likewise where the many were made sinners, the many will
    also be  made righteous. The statement clearly affirms the Universalist
    principle that God's love is for all  humankind. If where sin abounded,
    grace abounded all the more, then obviously grace is more powerful 
    than sin.  If God originally created all men in the likeness of Adam,
    good and holy and by the trespass of  Adam, all men were made sinners,
    then for God's Grace to be more powerful than  sin, everyone impacted 
    by Adam's trespass has to be more impacted by God's Grace.  I agree
    with Barrett when he says "Man's  rebellion cannot be victorious, or
    God would not be God" (>C.K. Barrett, Commentary on the Epistle to the 
    Romans) and with Erasmus when he says "the kindness of God is so bestowed
    that all the sins of all people  which now have been heaped up and
    firmly established are at once abolished by the death of 
    Christ" (Collected Works of Erasmus, Ed. Robert Sider(Toronto, U of
    Toronto Press, 1984)  However to  truly grasp this argument, we must
    reckon how all men participate in Adam's sin and in Christ's act of 
    righteousness.  William Barclay's argument is convincing  although his
    conclusion is not.  Barclay  provides a sociological understanding of
    Ancient man's self identification not as  an individual but as part  of
    a group (William Barclay, The Letter to the Romans, (Philadelphia,
    Westminister Press, 1955) 80- 81) Paul believed that all men as part of
    humanity actually participate in Adam's sin and all men as part  of
    humanity actually participate in Christ's goodness, thereby freeing
    them from the yoke of sin through  the gift of God's grace in Christ.
    Barclay sees Paul's tendency toward Universal Salvation here as a flaw. 
    He argues, that  man's connection with Adam is physical and involuntary
    and man's connection with  Christ is voluntary and can be accepted or
    rejected.  If Barclay's argument were true then the disobedience  of
    Adam would be more powerful than the obedience of Christ.  All
    humankind has no choice but to  participate in Adam's sin, therefore if
    good is truly more powerful than evil, the same number of  humanity,
    all, must participate in Christ.  There is no room for doubt in this
    passage;  The word "all" in  this passage is unmistakable.  There is
    also no room for free will in Paul's theology.  Without the gift of 
    divine Grace, an escape from sinfulness is impossible.  Free will
    implies that woman and men can save  themselves by their own freely
    chosen actions.  For Paul, it is only faith that saves. The message of 
    Romans 5 corresponds exactly with a similar passage in first
    Corinthians. For since death came through a  human being, the
    resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being.  "For as
    all die in Adam,  so all will be made alive in Christ" 1 Cor.
    15:21-22Again "all" is "all"  Even though Martin Luthur and  those who
    write in his tradition mistakenly substitutes "all who believe" for
    "all", making the gift of grace conditional upon acceptance,  I believe
     this is reading something into the passage that is not there.  Perhaps
     this is because Paul is not consistent on this point throughout Romans or
     throughout his letters.  In Romans 4:24b "It will be reckoned to us who
     believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead"  salvation is
     proclaimed for those who believe in God.  Romans is clearly not 
     consistent.  An analysis that is committed to the assumption of the 
    consistency of the book of Romans is  forced to make "all" mean something
    different than all. The other problem that
    Trinitarian Christians  must have with Paul's parallelism between Adam
    and Christ, is that as a representative man in who all of  humanity
    participate, Christ must be fully human and not divine.  Christ is
    essentially not different  than humankind, but the best example of
    perfected humanity. He is the first fruit of humanity to experience 
    the resurrection and the glory of God.  Others by adoption will be made
    brothers and sisters to Christ and  participate with him in his death
    and resurrection.  If Christ were divine, the notion of humankind 
    participating in Christ would be a different notion.  The parallelism
    between the one man Adam and the  one man Christ implies that they both
    are fully human.  I Cor 15:22 quoted above makes explicit "The 
    resurrection of the dead comes through a human being" what is implicit
    in Romans 5:18-21.  The  evidence for the separateness and
    subordination of Christ to God in Paul's letters is much stronger, than 
    the evidence for the equality of God and Christ.  Again, Paul is not
    consistent.  1 Cor 15:28("When all  things are subjected to him, then
    the Son himself will also be subjected to the one who put all things in 
    subjection under him, so that God may be all in all.") is strong
    evidence for the subordination of Christ to  God. Philippians
    2:6.6 "Who though he was in the form of God, did not regard equality
    with God as  something to be exploited.") is the strongest statement
    for the Trinitarian formula.  These are but two  conflicting arguments
    for or against the Unitarian principle. 
    
    There is another major flaw in Paul's  parallelism between Adam and Christ.
    Paul ignored the partnership nature of Adam's trespass and  thereby
    displays his own gender bias.  Paul has already established in the letter
    to the Corinthians that he  uses the second version of the creation story
    which has God creating Eve from Adam's rib.  Perhaps this  is his rational
    for omitting Eve- that Eve as women participates in the community of faith
    through Adam.   To include Eve in the Parallelism would also require a
    woman Christ.  To exclude women  continues the  traditional Judaic custom
    of including women in God's Covenant only through there relatedness to
    their  husbands or fathers. 
    
    Another problem is the move from a culture that viewed human groups as
    collectives  to a culture that assumes individual responsibility.
    Modern women and men define themselves as  individuals and not as
    absolute participants in a collected whole.  Would we ever want to
    establish a child  as morally and ethically responsible for the
    trespasses of her mother or father or of someone else in the 
    community.  Collective participation is the  basis of Paul's theology
    of salvation.  All humanity participate  in Adam's sinful state and
    therefore all humanity must participate in Christ for salvation.  How
    do we  make meaningful these concepts given our modern ideas of
    individual responsibility?
    
     Jungian Psychology  may offer some assistance in struggling with our
     understanding good and evil from a modern perspective.   Adam can be
     identified as the archetypal man searching for wisdom and meaning on his
     own terms.   Christ is the archetypal model of perfected humanity. 
     Humanity does carry in its consciousness the  universal struggle between
     good and evil which the archetypal faith that good is indeed more
     powerful  than evil. 
    
    Thus far I have discuss verses 18, 19, and 21.  They identify the 
    parallelism between the one  man's disobedience and the one man's 
    obedience, leading to the contrast between sin and grace. Verse 20  plays
    a different role relating law and trespass, sin and grace.  The idea is
    that humankind could not know  of its sinful condition until there was
    law.  If humankind could not know of its sinful condition, then 
    humankind could not appreciate the grace of God in Christ Jesus.  Law
    needed to abound, so that sin  could increase, so that grace could
    abound even more.  Paul is very consistent in his treatment of Grace 
    and law.  Law is good and not bad, but law assigns men responsibility
    for their transgressions because  they now know that what they do is
    evil and still cannot help doing that which is evil.  
    
    In this passage,  Paul goes one step further in showing how law
    provides the awareness of human sinfulness and therefore  even more
    clearly reveals the goodness of God's gift of Grace.  This verse is
    clear

   NRSV  Romans 5:17
    
    If because of the one man's trespass, death exercised dominion through
    that one, much more surely will those who receive the abundance of
    grace and the free gift of righteousness exercise dominion in life
    through the one man, Jesus Christ.
 

    I enter these excerps from the first Exegisis I completed last may into
    the Christian Notes file hoping to further exegete the passage there.
    
    I suspect I may get different feedback and comments here.
    
    I content that this passage unequivocally states that God's salvation
    is for everyone.   I know it appears to contradict some of Paul's other
    writings but I have a good capacity to hold contradictions.
    
    They are puzzling though when the contradictions are in Romans itself. 
    Almost all scholars accept Romans(except for the last chapter which is
    Paul's Goodbyes)as a complete literary unit so therefore I have to find
    some logic in the contradictions.
    
                                   Patricia

    Do you think this passage supports the Universalist claims?
    
    How does it fit in with the rest of Romans?
    
    
                                      Patricia

>    I content that this passage unequivocally states that God's
 >   salvation is for everyone.   I know it appears to contradict some of Paul's
 >   other writings but I have a good capacity to hold contradictions.
    
    I would like to touch on a few of your points.  First, Christianity in
    not exclusive.  I believe we have discussed this issue in the past.  It
    is only exclusive if the individual chooses to exclude it.  However,
    Christianity is inclusive...the results of ones beliefs are exclusive.  
    Salvation is free and is available to all who choose.  Paul's writings,
    particularly Romans chapters 3,4, and 8 in their context point this
    very matter out.
    
    The concept of universal salvation is not scripturally supported, even
    by Romans 5.  Even the hub verse of our faith, John 3:16 is followed by
    a stern warning in 3:18..."He who believes is not condemned but he who
    does not believe is condemned already because he hath not believed on
    the name of the only begotten son of God."  It isn't just Paul's
    chapters that contradict the notion of universal salvation, it is also
    the whole new testament.
    
    Now, as far as valuing the diversity of all religions, here's an eye
    opener for you...a historical account in itself...
    
    From Moses...One of the Greatest Prophets God brought forth...
    
    "But of the cities of these people, which the Lord God does give thee
    for an inheritance, thou shall save nothing that breatheth.  But thou
    shall utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, the Ammorites, the
    Canaanites, the Perezzites, the Hivites, the Jebusites, AS THE LORD THY
    GOD HATH COMMANDED THEE.  That they do not teach to you all their
    abominations, which they have done unto their gods, that you may sin
    against the Lord your God.  Deut. 20:16-18
    
    Keep in mind here that Israel was no bully here.  They were fewer in
    numbers and fought against the Nephalim...as if you were fighting a
    nine foot giant.  They battled but the Lord went before them.
    Yes, men, women, and children...obliterated!  
    
    Point here is that God deplored false religions and false worship.  So
    now you answer me if you would, was God exclusionary here...or is this
    part of biblical history uninspired?   This is important, we don't have
    the right to be revisionaries of what was recorded by Moses!
    
    I'd be interested in your reply.  Thanks.
    
    Rgds.,
    
    -Jack

hi patricia,


i intend to study your writing, not that you can expect much feedback 
from me (for lack of theological knowledge). i am primarily interested
in understanding your conclusions and sense that your theological view 
could be very attractive to non-believers.

i understand you chose the letters of paul because they are the most complete 
original writings preserved of the new testament. did i get this right?

also, is there any place in here where i might find a few biographical 
details on paul? 


what you write is quite impressive!

thanks and have a nice weekend!

andreas.

    Andreas,
    
    the writings of Paul are the only writings in the New Testament for
    whom we have substantial evidence of who wrote the books.  The issue of
    authorship for every other book of the Bible other than Romans, 1&2
    Corinthians, Philippians, Philemon, Galations & 1 Thesallonians(i'm 
    missing one book) is unknown or at least seriously debated.
    
    Paul is also the writings that I have studied more than the other
    writings.  I have had one course on the Corinthian Letters and the NT 2
    course which is the letters in the Bible.  I also finished the NT1
    course which was the Gospels and Acts.  A much too rapid journey.
    
    My assignment for the NT 2 class was to choose one passage in the
    Epistles and do a study of that passage.  That was the basis for my
    entry.  Like paul was always apt to do, I chose my passage for the
    community i.e. when I entered it into the other Christian Notes file.
    
    I believe that passage unequivocally says salvation is for all. It
    stands by itself as a significant challenge to those who both say they
    believe in the innerancy of the Bible and in selective salvation.  The
    only alternative left is to prove the passage does not say what it
    says. 
    
    I'm entering it here because it is a good passage and it raised some
    great questions about the whole of the letter to the Romans and about
    Paul's theolgoy in general.  There are also some passages in Romans
    that seem to say that salvation is not for everyone.  I need to better 
    understand exactly what Paul really is saying in Romans.
    
    

    So then if I understand you correctly, all the preaching Jesus did on
    hell and condemnation would have to do with living a miserable life on
    earth...is this correct?
    
    -Jack

    Some of my observations on Romans and universal salvation

    Paul equates the salvation of Jesus to be as all encompassing as
    the sin of Adam. If one assumes that sin is an inescapable property of
    humanness (eg. original sin, we are all sinners, etc) then one
    must also accept that the salvation of Jesus is equally entrenched
    in the very nature of humanness. If one believes that salvation is
    merely a potential state then one must also believe that sin is a
    potential state and therefore we are not all sinners.

    In 1 Cor 15:20-28, Paul seems to indicate resurrection (salvation)
    for *all*, each in its own time. Verses 29 also seems to indicate
    that one can receive salvation posthumously.

    
   > I would like to touch on a few of your points.  First, Christianity in
   > not exclusive.  I believe we have discussed this issue in the past.  It
   . is only exclusive if the individual chooses to exclude it.  However,
   > Christianity is inclusive...the results of ones beliefs are exclusive.  
   > Salvation is free and is available to all who choose.  Paul's writings,
   > particularly Romans chapters 3,4, and 8 in their context point this
   > very matter out.
    
    I too believe that Christianity is inclusive. I have also seen
    where some professed Christians have defined the belief criteria
    so narrow that it excludes a large number of other professed
    Christians.


   > The concept of universal salvation is not scripturally supported, even
   > by Romans 5.

    Then universal sin is not supported either. At least by Paul's
    analogy to Adam. 

    >  Even the hub verse of our faith, John 3:16 is followed by
    > a stern warning in 3:18..."He who believes is not condemned but he who
    > does not believe is condemned already because he hath not believed on
    > the name of the only begotten son of God."  

    If Blessed doesn't mean salvation then condemned doesn't mean
    unsaved. 

    As I said in another note "believe" means to follow the example
    and message of Jesus which was to love God and love your neighbor.

    While there is certainly a special place in the heart of God for
    those who follow the example of Jesus, I am not convinced that all
    of God's children (the human race) are not eventually
    "resurrected" at some point.

    Eric

>If one believes that salvation is merely a potential state then one must
>also believe that sin is a potential state and therefore we are not all
>sinners.

False.

One can affirm:

1. All are subject to committing sins because of the Fall.
2. God's salvation is available to all.
3. Some aren't interested in God's salvation, and are perfectly happy
   to remain in their sinful state.

At least (1) and (3) are observable in human society.

/john

    If we are "subjected to committing sins" through Adam, but only
    presented with possible salvation through Jesus, then it seems to me
    that Paul's analogy of Adam to Jesus is a poor one. Or is Paul's only
    point that through and individual stuff happens?

    I think it is possible to throw away your salvation by actively
    rejecting God (and we can discuss what constitutes rejecting God
    elsewhere). But even they can be posthumously saved through the
    baptism of others (1 Cor 15:29).

    Eric

1 Cor 15:29 is a reference to what is guessed to be a peculiar practice
in the early church about which no other information anywhere else exists.

There are no other records anywhere of baptizing on behalf of the dead.
Paul does not appear to either prove it or deny it; he appears to just
use it to support belief in the resurrection by saying "look, people do
this; would they do it if they didn't believe in the resurrection".

There may be posthumous ways to be saved.  However, many vehemently deny
this.  I believe that God is so merciful that he would provide such a
way; I don't believe even if he does that it works for everyone (i.e.
there are those that will reject even that).  However, I don't believe
it with the certainty that I would ever be able to advise someone to put
of working out his salvation.

"For you know not when your soul will be required of you."

/john

        John,

    Thanks for the insight on 1 Cor 15:29. 

    > "look, people do this; would they do it if they didn't believe in the
    > resurrection".

     My reading of the verse was more along the lines of "look, if the
    baptism for the dead didn't work, then what power does the resurrection
    of Christ have? For if the Resurrection will conquer death, then all the
    dead will be raised, but each in his own season according to the
    order assigned by God."

    Eric

    Also, when you closely read Romans for how the Jews will be saved,
    there is an implication of salvation for the dead. 
    
    The Jews are hardened so the mission to the Gentiles will succeed.  But
    after the full number of Gentiles are brought in, then the Jews
    themselves will be saved.  This implies a post humonous salvation as
    well.
    
    Also the Adam/Christ parallelism is in Corinthians too.  Christ has to
    be more powerful than Adam.  If all sin in Adam, all are saved in
    Christ.
    
    
    Patricia

    Our heritage in Adam is inherited at birth.  Jesus Christ put
    conditions on salvation:
    
    Hear
    Believe
    Receive
    
    If you read on later in Romans 9, you will see that Pauls affirmation
    that the Jews were NOT saved.  He stated that if possible, he would
    give his eternal life for their salvation.  This to me constitutes the
    greatest love of all!  
    
    Again Patricia, one must ask the question...what is the significance of
    Christs death and resurrection if sin did not have to be atoned for!?
    
    -Jack

re Note 1040.18 by MKOTS3::JMARTIN:

>     Again Patricia, one must ask the question...what is the significance of
>     Christs death and resurrection if sin did not have to be atoned for!?
  
        If this question has any significance, then it is also valid
        to ask:  "what is the significance of Christ's death and
        resurrection if the debt of sin remains for *anyone*?"

        Bob

        > Our heritage in Adam is inherited at birth.  Jesus Christ put
    > conditions on salvation:

    Then there really isn't much of a comparison between Adam and Jesus. 

    > what is the significance of Christs death and resurrection...

    Possibly...
    That Jesus was willing to die for spreading God's message.
    That Jesus was a pacifist and would not fight the authorities.

    
    	Eric

    Very much significance.  The debt of sin must be dealt with on an
    individual basis.  This is why the theme of not just the New Testament
    but also of the prophets is faith.  Take the two theives on the cross
    for example.  One was justified by faith and the other was not.  Take
    the two men in the synagogue.  One puffed his chest with pride and
    thanked God he was not like the other man...a wretched sinner.  The
    other, not even looking upward, beat his chest and said, "Lord forgive
    me, a sinner".  The rich man was still in his iniquity but the poor man
    walked away justified.
    
    To reject the atoning power of Christ is, in essence, taking on the
    role of the pharisee...denying the basic need of justification.  Jesus
    preached on this concept throughout his whole ministry!
    
    -Jack

    re: .11
    
    Jack,
    
    The Bible speaks of both a realized salvation, here and now and a
    future salvation.  Some passages have more emphasis on one some have
    more on the other.
    
    When we experience God's Grace we become New Creation.  The Gospels and
    Paul's letters address both aspects of Salvation.  My own personal 
    experience and the experience I have heard from others allows me to speak
    about realized salvation.
    
    It is the sudden transformation and serenity that comes from trusting
    in a power outside of ourselves.
    
    I prefer to speak from experiences rather than try to predict what
    happens to us after we die.
    
    
                                Patricia

    regarding .21
    
    To insist on the atoning purpose of Jesus' death is to limited the
    Power of God to forgive us our trespasses, in whatever way he chooses.

    Problem is that if we do this, we are basing our doctrine on a
    measurement that is incomplete...and inconsistent considering our
    experiences are different and at different levels of maturity.  
    
    It sounds like you are content with the realized salvationbut I still
    don't quite understand the difference between the two.  It almost
    sounds like one would be saying, "I realize my salvation because my
    feelings dictate this..but future salvation is of no significance to me
    as I don't want to address what happens after I die."  In others words,
    one is saved because they feel saved but actualiies are of no
    importance.  If this be the case, is this really a wise route to take?

     >>   To insist on the atoning purpose of Jesus' death is to limited the
     >>   Power of God to forgive us our trespasses, in whatever way he
     >>   chooses.
    
    "WITHOUT the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin."
    
    A very direct message to the Hebrews.  This spells out God's choice for
    the remission of sin.  There is no other way!
    
    -Jack

    REalized in the context that I am using it means that it has actually
    happened.  If one has been crucified with Jesus, then one is reborn in
    Christ and Christ in them.  They are a new creation.  They are dead to
    sin.    They live their life guided by Christ who is in their hearts.
    
    I will dig out the Biblical passages that support this concept.
    
    My assumption is that someone who lives their life guided by the Spirit
    of Christ written in their hearts does not have to worry about future
    salvation.  They live their lifes moment by moment in Christ.  this
    does not mean that they never sin.  It is a way of being, a way of
    living, not a way of doing.  Such a person bears good fruits.
    
                            Patricia

        re .21

    Jack,

    I don't think I understand from your note how you view the analogy of 
    Jesus to Adam. 

    > One puffed his chest with pride and thanked God he was not like the
    > other man...a wretched sinner.  The other, not even looking upward,
    > beat his chest and said, "Lord forgive me, a sinner".

    And now we say, "Lord forgive me, a sinner... and thank you Lord that I
    am not that the other man, a blind, wretched, secular humanist, 
    bleeding heart liberal." :^) Present company accepted, of course.

    > Jesus preached on this concept [justification] throughout his whole
    > ministry!

    Some would argue the concept that Jesus preached was love of God and
    neighbor, humility and self sacrifice as the path to salvation. Did
    Jesus really claim that we are only saved through belief in his being a
    human sacrifice to God?

    Eric 

    I challenge jack to show where Jesus ever claimed to be a human
    sacrifice for God.
    
    I would bet someone could enter every passage where the theory of
    attoning sacrifice,( never explicitly explained but occasionally hinted
    at) and still not run over the 100 line limit.

    Patricia:
    
  >>      I challenge jack to show where Jesus ever claimed to be a human
  >>      sacrifice for God.
    
    Accepted.  The hundred line limit may be a problem as there are also
    alot of Old Testament passages that speak in prophetic context.  I will
    however give it a try as the Lord leads me.
    
    Peace,
    
    -Jack

Below is approximately 50 lines dealing with the blood sacrifice of Jesus
Christ.  Another 50 lines, and even more, can be obtained.  However, before I 
go typing a bunch more verses, I would like to see how these are received!

------------------------------------------
Surely he has bore our griefs, and carried our sorrows.  Yet we did esteem him 
stricken, smitten of God and afflicted.  But he was wounded for our
transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our
peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed.
All we like sheep have gone astray.  Each one has turned to his own way;
but the Lord hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all.  Isaiah 53:4-6
VERY IMPORTANT: "YET IT PLEASED THE LORD TO BRUISE HIM, he hath put him to 
grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering FOR SIN, he shall see his seed
, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in
His hand. Vs. 10!  (This alone is enough but I will gladly continue!) 
------------------------------------------
Many bulls have compassed me, many bulls have beset me around.  They gaped upon
me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.  I am poured out like
water, and all my bones are out of joint.  My heart is like wax, it is melted
in the midst of my bowels.  My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my
tongue cleaveth unto my jaw.  THOU hast brought me unto the dust of death.
Psalm 22: 12-15.
------------------------------------------
Then Jesus said unto them, Truly truly I say unto you, except you eateth my 
flesh and drinketh my blood, you have no life in you.  Whosoever eateth my
flesh and drinketh my blood hath eternal life.  And I will raise him up on the
last day...He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwells in me and
I in him.  John 6:55-56
------------------------------------------
Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that COME UNTO GOD BY 
HIM, seeing he lives forever to make INTERCESSION for them.  For such a high 
priest became us, holy, harmless, and undefiled, separate from sinners and made
higher than the heavens.  Who needs not daily as those high priests, to offer
up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the peoples.  For this HE
DID ONCE WHEN HE OFFERED UP HIMSELF (Patricia, PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THIS)
Hebrews 7:25-27.
------------------------------------------
Then said he Lo, I COME TO DO THE WILL OF GOD.  He take away the first that he 
may establish the second, by which we are sanctified THROUGH THE OFFERING OF
THE BODY OF JESUS CHRIST ONCE FOR ALL!  And every priest stands daily 
ministering and offering oftentimesthe same sacrifices, which can never take 
away sins: but this man, after he offered one sacrifice for sins forever,
sat down at the right hand of God.  Hebrews 10:9-11.
------------------------------------------
Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.  Having 
therefore boldness to enter into the holiness by the blood of Jesus, by a 
new and living way which he hath consecrated for us through the vail, that is
to say, His flesh, and having a high priesthood over the house of God, let us
draw near with a true heart..."  Hebrews 10:17-20.
------------------------------------------
My little children, these things I have written to you that you may not sin.  
And if any man sin we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the
righteous.  And he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, 
but for the sins of the whole world.  1st John 2:1,2.
------------------------------------------
Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for 
us: for it is written, cursed be anyone who hangs from a tree.  That the 
promise of Abraham might come on the gentiles through Jesus Christ, that we
might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.  Galatians 3:13,14.
------------------------------------------
From that point on Jesus began to tell his disciples how he must go to Jerusalem
and suffer many things of the elders and the chief priests and scribes...and 
be killed and raised on the third day.  Peter rebuked him saying, Lord, may 
this never be.  Jesus said unto him, Get thee behind me Satan, for thou art a 
rock of offense to me."  Matthew 16.
------------------------------------------

    Jack,
    
    I print them out take them home and read them.
    
    I need another 50 lines though.
    
    a challenge is a challenge you know!
    
                               Cheers