Eternal Union of Christ and His Children

So this is your so-called response to my challenge????? You simply make a assertion that has nothing to do with my challenge, nothing to do with the text - Rom. 8:30 - nothing to do with anything but simply parroting the same old unfounded, disproven assertion.

 

No you have not. If you had you would either point the post out or repeat it. I have looked and you have done no such thing.

This is supposed to be a discussion forum not a proganda forum where one simply repeats over and over again a view that has been totally proven to be false. Deal with the evidence or why continue to discuss?

 

That is simply answered by saying it was a union at that point only by purposed provision for the elect and nothing more and Christ obtained that purposed provision for the elect in both his life and death as the purposed representative man for His people. However, he was not in any kind of actual spiritual union with any of His elect previous to their regeneration which was also previously purposed and provided by His death in in their behal.

First, you do not know the meaning of the "church" in scriptures as there was no such "church" previous to the ministry of Christ as there was no "foundation" for such a church without the apostles (Eph. 2:20) who were set "FIRST" into that "church" (I Cor. 12:28). No such "church" existed in the Old Testament or in the garden of Eden. You are confused and do not distinguish properly between the kingdom of God versus the family of God versus the church of God as they are not synonymous terms. The church is given the keys of THE KINGDOM but it is not the kingdom (Mt. 18:17). The church contains SOME of God's family members but it is not the family.

The comparative contrast between Adam and Christ is not between Adam and the Eternal Son of God - that is your first mistake.

Your second mistake is that those "in Adam" did not precede CREATION but were CREATED in him and likewise those "in Christ" - Eph. 2:10. Other than being "created in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:10) the family members in Adam and the family members in Christ only preceded CREATION by PURPOSEFUL THOUGHT but in no actual existent form whether it was "in Adam" or was "in Christ."

John is referring to his NATURE AS GOD not his NATURE as man. He is referring to him as the ETERNAL WORD not his redemptive work as the incarnate God man.

This is nothing but flat mormonism and polythesism. John's words cannot be construed to support this heresy in any way shape or form. Ther is no EXACT parallellism between Adam and Christ when it comes to children and you know that. Christ's children did not come by way of generation but regeneration. Christ's children were not part of HIS NATURE but were fully human in nature so they had to be ADOPTED into his family and REgenerated for spiritual union with His Spirit.

The term "head" simply means "authority" in this context. If you attempt to make it mean some kind of "spiritual union" then he was in spiritual union with all creation - thus pantheism, as much as, he was in spiritual union with the church as Paul says in Ephesians 1:22


22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,

The term "head" NEVER means spiritual union in the scriptures when used metaphorically. If you view was true then Christ is in "spiritual union" with every human male ever born as Paul says:

1 Cor. 11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

Did you know what Paul "would have you know" concerning the HEADSHIP of Christ over "every man"??? So much for your spiritual union application of the metaphor "head."

You should be a Mormon because this is nothing but pure Mormon kind of eisgesis. You take a purely physical truth and pervert it by applying it to a spiritual substance. A PHYSICAL HUMAN family always exists in their father due to CREATED reproductive capacity. You say, "so it is with" Christ. To apply this to the preincarnate God the Son is pure Mormonism. Why not attribute a human body to the PRE-incarnate Son of God as well. Why not attribute CHICKEN WINGS to God as well as God describes himself with chicken "wings" that protect his chicklings.

 

The covenant was made before the world began - no question - but what you are ignoring is the terms of the covenant preceded the administration of the covenant and the administration did not occur before the world began and absolute proof is that "every mouth" and "all the world" were CONDEMNED BY THE LAW and UNDER THE LAW as sinners and remained lost until they were saved, remained unjustified until they were justified by faith, remained unregenerate until they were regenerated and remained "children of wrath" even as other until they were born "children of God."

 

Very well stated, Brother!! :thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

A better way to say this would be that Jesus took our sins, all of mankind's sin, upon Himself, and made the atonement for our sins. That those who would believe that He is, and that He is a Rewarder of them which do diligently seek Him, would receive His atoning Grace. At that moment, they are then placed in Christ.

 

Commentaries on Eph. chapter 1.

Matthew Henry:
http://www.christnotes.org/commentary.php?com=mhc&b=49&c=1


John Wesley:
http://www.christnotes.org/commentary.php?b=49&c=1&com=wes

Here are two who disagree with your stance on when we are in Christ.

 

I dealt with post #65 in detail and yet you ignored 99% of my response. So how can you tell others not to change the subject when you are avoiding detailed responses to that post???????? My response to post #65 is repeated below.

 

Why are you on this forum? This is a discussion forum. A Forum for reasonable ard rational debate!

You have no intentions of discussing anything reasonably and rationally but rather you here to propagandize your irrational ideas and seek converts.

There is no sense in using so many threads to discuss anything with you as nothing but complete nonsense is the consequence. I am therefore dropping all discussion but the thread on Romans 11 and there I have placed before you Biblical and grammatical evidence in abundance that you are wrong. I will simply let you beat your head against God's Word on that thread.

 

Yeah right! You comment on non-essentials and intentionally ignore the VAST amoung of Bibical and rational evidence placed before you! That is not discussion, that is not even serious exchange of ideas. I have spent most my time repeating evidence that destroys your whole position and all you do is IGNORE and RUN and REPEAT what has been proven wrong!

 

I did not change the subject, Bro. SBG. Here was the last sentence of the post you questioned.

At that moment, they are then placed in Christ.

I was using that post to show you that we are placed into Christ the very instant He pours His blood over us, and cleanses our soul, and makes it white as wool. We can not be in rebellion(a sinner), and still be in Christ.