"Be Dead" - Rom. 5:15 = spiritual death

Discussion in 'Calvinism/Arminianism Debate' started by The Biblicist, Dec 26, 2013.

  1. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    15 But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, has abounded to many.
    16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses to justification
    .

    1. The offense brought immediate death as the words "be dead" represent a completed action verb.

    2. This condition "be dead" is the direct result of "the offence" which is the direct and immedate result of "judgment....to condemnation."

    Paul is repudiating that spiritual death among the human race is due to individuals sins. Man comes naturally into this world already judged to this condemnation and "BE DEAD" spiritually upon their individual existence.

    Paul is repudiating that humans are born uncondemned to this judgement already due to one sin by Adam. They come into individual existence condemned already (Jn. 3:18) under the wrath of God (Jn. 3:36; Eph. 2:3) due to ONE MAN'S Sin rather than individual sins plural - By one man's disobedience many were MADE SINNERS by nature as they come into existence already spiritually dead.

    This is self-evident as non human comes into life a believer in God or Christ. Every infant manifests pure SELFISHNESS that must be trained to RESTRAIN and CONTROL. Thus all come short of the "glory of God" as the proper motive for whatever they say and do.
     
  2. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dead simply means to be condemned. Jesus called living men "dead".

    Mat 8:21 And another of his disciples said unto him, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.
    22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.

    Was Jesus telling his disciples to let physically dead people bury other physically dead persons? Nonsense.

    Again, if sin and spiritual dead is unconditionally imputed to all men because of Adam, then righteousness and life would also be imputed unconditionally to all men.

    You have to treat both sides of these verses equally, this is the form of parallel argument Paul is using.

    Once a person understands that sin is conditionally imputed to all men who sin like Adam, then it is easy to understand that all who believe as Jesus did will conditionally be imputed righteous.

    In this argument there is no contradiction and both sides of each verse are parallel.
     
  3. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    No, he is telling them to let the spiritual dead bury the physical dead as none among the Jews kept the law (Jn. 7:19) but all were condemned to death who attempted to keep it.

    You position creates a false choice of options. First, one cannot be condemned without violating law. Second Romans 5:12-15 clearly refers to ONE LAW in Genesis 2:17 violated by ONE MAN that brought universal judgement unto the condemnation of death upon ALL MEN. Genesis 2:17 cannot possibly be restricted to spiritual death or only physical death but includes the totality of death - spiritual, physical and eternal death -- "dying thou shalt surely die."


    That is not our position. We believe all humanity existed in and acted in unison as ONE MAN and therefore when Adam sinned all sinned equally meeting the conditions of Genesis 2:17. Get our position right first and then come talk to me.



    You are failing to read and understand Romans 5:17. Paul has contrasted things between Adam and Christ in verses 15-17. The last contrast is that grace is a "gift" which is received rather than something automatically imputed to men as was death by Adam.
     
  4. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    You are plain wrong here, and this is where your error begins. Paul clearly said men without the law shall perish without the law, because they are a law to themselves, the law being written on their hearts.

    Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
    13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
    14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
    15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another; )

    You are just plain wrong, but I know you will never admit it.
     
  5. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    Why not learn to READ better! Look at verse 15 and the words "which shew the WORK OF THE LAW written in their heart."

    He does not say it is the Law written in their heart, but rather concience DOES THE SAME WORK that God designed the Mosaic law to do - distinguish between right and wrong.

    Secondly, He does not provide conscience as the UNIVERSAL cause for death for those living between Adam and Moses or even those living after Moses but inserts it here only for GENTILES. HEnce, your interpretation is proved false again as the only law violated that can be attributed to UNIVERSAL DEATH is neither conscience or the Law of Moses but the ONE LAWY violated by ONE MAN which brought sin into the world and death by sin - Genesis 2:17.
     
  6. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am not going to keep arguing with you. Paul is clearly showing men from Adam to Moses did not sin "in Adam" as you falsely teach. They died for their own sins because they violated the law written on their hearts and conscience.

    If your view was correct, why would Paul even mention the work of the law on their hearts and conscience?

    And note that Paul did not mention Adam whatsoever in Romans 2. No, these men died for their own sin, not Adam's.

    You can argue all you want, it won't make you right.
     
  7. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    Good! Read and learn!


    "By one man's disobedience many were made sinners" is Paul's response to your false teaching which directly contradicts his words. If your idea was right he would have said "by many men's sins many are made sinners"

    Not only so but the very first words "by one man sin entered the world and death by sin" is repeatedly given as the source of both death and sin within mankind - "by one man...by one man's...by one man.....by one man...."

    Because a select portion of men - non-Jews do not have special written revelation to discern between right and wrong. Conscience only provides the role of what special revelation provides - a basis to prove they are sinners. However, Romans 5:12-19 is about UNIVERSAL DEATH due to ONE MAN's DISOBEDIENCE of the law in Genesis 2:17 as Adam did not violate any other law.


    Your denials are all empty of any scriptural basis and so why keep on denying the obvious?
     
  8. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Albert Barnes agreed with my interpretation;

    Albert Barnes agrees with my interpretation perfectly.
     
  9. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    I thought you said you were not going to continue arguing????????


    Give me a break! Do you think that merely finding someone to quote that supports your false doctrine makes it any truer? However, that is all you have left since you cannot respond to BIBLICAL evidence placed before you and the reader can easily see that by merely reveiwing the posts.
     
  10. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think that Barnes shows my interpretation to be very reasonable, he came up with the same interpretation.

    And I have presented plenty of evidence to support my position and refute yours, especially Eze 18:20;

    Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

    Ezekiel 18:20 is as plain as the nose on your face, God does not impute the sin of the father to his son or vice versa. Every man dies for his own sin.
     
  11. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    I never said that others don't hold your interpretation. I can equally provide well know expositors that support my position but what good is that??????? Who cares if uninspired men agree or disagree with an interpretation???? I can find a lot of well known uninspired men whose interpretations we both would disagree with!

    However, I agree with Barnes. We are not teaching "imputation" of sin but the actual presence and existence of the entire human nature acting in unison as ONE MAN which literally and actually sinned and thus "all have sinned" when Adam sinned. They did not need sin to be imputed since they are the ones who actually sinned in Adam. Hence, death between Adam and Moses proved they were the actual sinners. Death could be justly "imputed" because they actually existed and acted as one indivisible human nature sinning in one man.

    No, you have not. EVERY SINGLE SOLITARY EVIDENCE you have provided has been exposed by the immediate context to be absolutely false. Anyone reading our posts who has an objective mind can easily see that and the fact you HAVE NO REPONSE but to repeat the same words while IGNORING the contrary evidence proves my point.



    You still don't understand our position!! We are not arguing that we are made sinners because of Adam's sin imputed to us. We are saying that the whole human nature existed and consisted and acted in unison in ONE MAN and thus WE SINNED when Adam Sinned. Ezekiel 18 is about blaming others who DID NOT COMMIT a certain sin committed by another person. What don't you understand about EXISTING and ACTING as one human nature, the whole of humanity in ONE MAN????? If you understood our position you would never be quoting Ezekiel 18 as it has no application whatsoever.

    I thought you said you were going to stop arguing with me????
     
    #11 The Biblicist, Dec 26, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 26, 2013
  12. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Barnes does not agree with you at all. He understood this argument you are trying to make and refuted it.

    You are trying to be clever, but no one is fooled. If a person actually sinned with Adam when he sinned, then they not only would be guilty of a like sin, but they would be guilty of the EXACT same sin.

    This is what I wrote in my first post.

    Note that almost all Calvinists themselves rejected this view of yours.
     
  13. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    Barnes is a Presbyterian or infant baptizer. His argument is false when he concludes:

    If this doctrine be true, then it is certain that they not only had "sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," but had committed the very identical sin, and that they were answerable for it as their own.

    He selects only one idea of "simlitude" while ignoring that it refers to a LIKENESS which is NOT IDENTICAL. This term is NEVER used in Scripture for the IDENTICAL thing but ALWAYS for something DIFFERENT from the original:


    Heb 7:15 And it is yet far more evident: for that after the similitude of Melchisedec there rises another priest,

    Jas 3:9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.

    So both of you are wrong in your use and definition of "simlitude" as it is only used in the New Testament for something DIFFERENT than the original but only LIKE it.

    13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
    14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.


    Second, you are both wrong about the field of humans being examined in verse 14b. Verse 13-14a provides the limitation of the field of humans being examined to be between Adam and Moses IN GENERAL. However, verse 14b narrows that field even more by the words "even those which had not sinned after the simlitude of Adam's transgression" thus separating these from the general population being considered within that restricted field.

    Hence, "even those" refer to a distinct set of humans that death was imputed in addition to general population of human beings being considered between Adam and Moses. Their selection and distinction from the rest of that restricted population in general is that they do not sin "after the similitude of Adam's transgression." Meaning, the rest of humanity in generral did sin "after the simlitude of Adam's transgression" or else no such distinction could be made and Paul does make such a distinction by the words "even those."

    Hence, what division can be made in the general population of human beings on the basis of the "similitude of Adam's transgression" who suffer death? The only possible basis on that distinction is that of WILLFUL sin versus those incapable of willful sin - infants and/or those incapable of willful transgression. Those who sin willfully may have willfully violated light of reason, light of nature, light of conscience, light of cultural traditions or any number of self-imposed civilizational laws among them or special revelation given to some of them. However, the only law that attributes universal death to its violation between Adam and Moses is Genesis 2:17 that can only be broken universally by men as existent and acting as one undivided human nature in one man - Adam.


    In Verse 14b Paul is restricting his application to even a more narrow field between Adam and Moses "even those" which are distinguished from the rest of humanity living in that same period who did not sin after the similitude of Adam but nevertheless death reigned over. The only possible narrower field of humans in general between Adam and Moses are infants and those incapable of expressing WILLFUL SIN as that is the likeness of Adam's transgression as Paul points out in 1 Tim. 2:13. This again proves that the only possible grounds for death reigning over them is that they existed and participated as one undivided human nature acting in unison in ONE MAN.


    I Thought you said you were not going to continue arguing with me??????
     
  14. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Baloney.

    Men from Adam to Moses did not sin after the similitude of Adam because it was impossible. There was only one law, and that was that you could not eat of the tree of knowledge. That was impossible because man was chased out of the garden and an angel is guarding it. I believe after Noah's flood that the garden with the tree of life was in the center of the earth (Luke 16).

    Men from Adam to Moses were men "without the law" and so perished "without the law" as Paul explained in Romans 2:12-15.

    Romans 2:12-15 would be a lie if your view is true for several reasons.

    #1 There would be no such thing as a man without the law. According to your belief, all men personally sinned with Adam in the garden. Adam had one law, and all persons would likewise have that one law.

    So, there would be no such thing as men "without the law".

    #2 Men without the law would not perish because they offended the law written on their hearts as Rom 12:12-15 teaches, they would die because they sinned with Adam in the garden.

    Your view FAILS in every possible way, but you will keep attempting to torture scripture to try to make Calvinism work. It ain't gonna happen.
     
  15. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    This is the essence and substance of your soteriology as you have no substantive responses to evidence placed before you. The words "even those" separates the following persons from among those mentioned in general and that is the obvious sense.

    If you wrongly define "similtude" to mean the EXACT SAME SIN by those living OUTSIDE the garden then you are right. However, if you define "simlitude" as something DIFFERENT than the original sin but LIKE it then you are wrong as men sin after the similitude of adam's sin every single day - willful sin against a known and revealed law. However, the only law existent and revealed to men by God that warned of universal death is Genesis 2:17 between Adam and Moses as NO OTHER LAW CAN BE FOUND with that universal warning.



    But not impossible if the total human nature existed and acted in one man, then by "one man sin entered the world and death by sin, for that all men have sinned" already when Adam sinned.

    False. Genesis 2:17 was a known law and Adam was there to testify to it right to the year before the flood.

    False. Genesis 9:5-6 is another law revealed to Noah after the flood and Shem was alive and testified of it until the time of Abraham.

    However, only Genesis 2:17 existed as a revealed law concerning the origin of death upon all men.


    I have repudiated every reason you have given thus far.

    Genesis 2:17 was known by Adam and Adam lived to the flood and so this law was universally known as the cause of universal death among men.

    Genesis 9:5-6 was known by Noah and his sons and Shem lived beyond the time of Abraham.

    But there is NO RECORD of conscience as the source of universal sin or death prior to Moses.



    Romans 2:11-15 (not Rom. 12:12-15) has nothing to do with the ORIGIN of sin and death in either Romans 2 or Romans 5 but is SUPPLEMENTARY just to prove the existence of individual sin at the day of judgment. Neither can it be found revealed to men between Adam and Moses as the stated cause of universal sin and death. Only one Law can be found to explain universal sin and death between Adam and Moses and that is Gen. 2:17 and that is precisely what Romans 5:12-19 repeatedly states over and over again but you simply can't comprehend that.
     
  16. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your arguments are lame, especially your "similitude" argument. You are just making yourself look foolish, it is obvious you are grasping at straws.

    Men spiritually die when they knowingly and willingly sin just as Adam sinned.

    Romans 5 was not written to teach Original Sin, it was simply showing how God's grace through Jesus Christ overcame the judgment and condemnation passed down to all men when they sinned as Adam sinned. Those who believe on Jesus as Jesus trusted his Father are imputed righteous.
     
  17. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,114
    Likes Received:
    206
    If that is so, then why can't the readrs find ANY RESPONSES to the contextual based reasons given to repudiate your bare assertions??????



    If you can't see the introductory assertion to the contrary "by one man sin entered the world and death by sin" which is repeatedly confirmed over and over and over again as the SINGULAR reason for sin, judgement to the condemnation of death in Romans 5:12-19 then you can't be helped. Paul NEVER ONCE says "individual sins make many sinners" or "many be dead" as your interpretation demands and you are trying to READ INTO this text. Original sin is the repeated statment "by one man's sin" throughout over and over again. Give it up!
     
  18. Yeshua1

    Yeshua1
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Messages:
    17,023
    Likes Received:
    47
    The ApostlesALL affirmed that we are sinners by our very natures, that comes out as choosing to sin, why can't others see that here?
     
  19. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,256
    Likes Received:
    185
    In my opinion, folks "can't ... see" it because it would require a rejection of a scheme in which they cling despite being shown ad nauseum the scheme is frail or in error.

    I am reminded of the elementary fights that boil down to who shouts the loudest or who makes one cry first as justification to proclaim them self as the winner.

    How many threads has a person stopped posting and the other proclaims that they have in some manner presented the superior argument.

    No, the reason could just be that it is no longer edifying to show how foolish the opposing argument has become.
     

Share This Page

Loading...