In Christ

I'd attend. :thumbs:

 

I'm sorry I will not have the time to take alot of time on this thread. I would love it.

So, I'll not play around like a do a lot, but get to the point.

When you read through Romans 5, it is clear that Paul's main topic is the Adam vs Christ (the 2nd Adam) comparison. He introduces the comparison in verse 12, "just as through one man," .

Paul says, just as Adam sinned, so also we are sinners because of Adam. Adam is the "Federal Representative" of mankind. We are "IN ADAM" when we are born into this world. This holds true both for our body and our spirit.

Please notice that Paul is not comparing the "one man" with "all men," but that Adam's sin was itself the sin of all people. When Adam sinned, he as the federal representative caused all of mankind to be "in sin".

Paul is not comparing us with Adam, but IS comparing Christ with Adam and that the cause of our death was NOT our trespass, but Adam's. .

So this is what we must agree upon. We are SINNERS not of our own choice, but because of ONE man....ADAM.

Paul calls this in other places...."IN ADAM"

Paul shows the relationship of Christ with Adam in Romans 5:14 when he says that Adam "was a pattern [Greek typos] of the one to come."

So what about being ..."IN CHRIST"?

O'Brien makes several ambiguous statements about how the phrase designates "Christ as the 'sphere' in which the divine decisions are made and put into effect", but he is after all referring to "The idea of the incorporation of many into a representative head".

In other words, "in Christ" refers to Christ as the agent or means by which God performs his divine plan. In other contexts, it refers to Christ as the federal head of the elect.

This understanding of "in Christ" which is also seen in Romans 5 as we saw above helps prevent distortions and dilutions of predestination, as well as other false teachings that are based on the phrase.


"In Christ" refers to Christ's agency and representation, and not our being "inside" of Christ in a mystical or even physical sense. In fact, en in the Greek can be translated "in," "by," or "with,". So "in Christ often means BY Christ and WITH Christ".

So really the meaning is this....

THE ELECT...or...to be in a saved condition.....WITH the work of Christ. Or the ELECT, by the means of Christ work.
Or...The old "In Adam vs In Christ found in Romans 5.


Paul addresses this more in..1 Corinthians 15:22

So this is what must be answered....

Did you chose to be "IN ADAM"?

Ok now notice that the word "IN"....in the phrase..."IN CHRIST"...and in the phrase IN ADAM...is part of the standing condition which is toward those the writer is addressing. It does not mean that we are chosen only because we are IN the elect. IN....is part of the phrase.

If anything, "IN CHRIST" it is showing the work of Christ (being the new Adam), that placed us in the elect, the new race which Christ is the head of, apart from anything we have done.


Tthis being the case the passage in Eph 1, plays in favor of the Calvinist view. This is seen outside the phase "in Christ" as it relates to the context as well as inside the meaning of the phrase itself. This should be clear as you now read the text in that light.

 

Ummm... You missed all the points that led up to Romans 5. Paul said (Romans 3:24-26) that those who trusted God before Christ's arrival had their sins "overlooked" so that they could be justified when Christ arrived. When Christ arrived, the "new creation" has begun because the Second Adam has arrived. Those who already had faith were not "in" the Second Adam until he arrived, but they did have faith.

4and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus. 25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

This "justification" arrived with the Second Adam, and was bestowed upon all these waiting for him, by faith, not to mention all who would believe in the future (when they believed).

Furthermore, Romans 5:

Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. And we rejoice in the hope of the glory of God.

Faith---->gains access into God's grace------>in which we now stand [in Christ, the Second Adam]

When reading Romans 5, it's best to start with the first verse (not to mention the earlier chapters).

With this in mind we understand why some (NIV, for example) translates Eph 1:14 "You were included in Christ when you believed."

I studied Ephesians under Peter O'Brien, btw.

 

BB

Is there any Scripture that teaches we are regenerated or "born again" or "born from above" by faith?

 

Received by faith? Yes, actually, I was discussing that last week in the now legendary series about D. A. Carson's view of John 3. Being born again is both soteriologically and historically after faith.

In Galatians 3, Paul describes the faithful Jews as awiting Jesus Christ because the law could not give life. But that promised "life" came "through faith in Jesus Christ," "to all who believe." They were already believing God BEFORE life came.

21Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! For if a law had been given that could impart life, then righteousness would certainly have come by the law. 22But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith in Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe.

23Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. 24So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ[h] that we might be justified by faith. 25Now that faith has come, we are no longer under the supervision of the law.

 

Hummm. ok

You mean these verses below?

 

It's not clear what you are attempting to say/prove in your post. I have no problem with Adam vs Christ or any by/in distinction. Notice in my last two posts what I said about the Second Adam. I was talking about Christ there, so I was addressing the same thing. Talking about the later verses doesn't affect what I said.

I took notes on his Ephesains and Colossians class. I sat in on his Romans class.

 

Where did the faith come from? Verse 23 indicates it came from somewhere.

 

IMO, yes, of course it would. It has to do with our the source of our life.

Here is the manner in which we are:

"In Christ"​

John 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.​

John 17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.​

"In Christ", we draw our very life from the life of God, the substance of the divine nature, not the life principle of the flesh (the oxygenated blood of Adam).

Leviticus 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: ...​

If we remained "in Adam" after regeneration, we would sin into eternity.

Since Adam was promised death for his sin, if he and his seed are enabled to continue to live (though all do indeed die) then a new life force must be found for him.​

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.​

1 Peter 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.​

2 Peter 1:4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.​

HankD​

 

Old Regular said:

Now that was uncalled for. Just because I disagreed with the sermon by Spurgeon that you posted does not mean I am elevating myself above him or any other person. I simply believe he was in error on certain points and provided scripture to back my personal beliefs.

And do not you disagree with famous preachers who say Calvinism is wrong?

 

Old Regular said:



Now that was uncalled for. Just because I disagreed with the sermon by Spurgeon that you posted does not mean I am elevating myself above him or any other person. I simply believe he was in error on certain points and provided scripture to back my personal beliefs. [/quote]

I suppose it was the way you said it. I disagree with Spurgeon on his premillennial views, though I would not wish to debate him on the subject. I am in essential agreement with him on his views on the Doctrines of Grace or the Sovereignty of God in Salvation.

As far as I know there are no preachers of Spurgeon's stature who are Arminian since you have declined the honor I facetiously [well almost] bestowed.

 

I believe Romans 8:1 defines what "in Christ" means.

Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

So, a person in Christ walks after the Spirit. But to walk after the Spirit, the Holy Spirit must dwell in you.

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

 

Old Regular asked:

We are quickened or regenerated by the Holy Spirit.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.

1 Pet 3:18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:

You are not regenerated by faith. But by faith from hearing God's word a man will come to Christ in his heart. And Jesus has promised to give the Holy Spirit to those who come to him for it. When the Holy Spirit comes into a man, then he is born again (regenerated).

John 4:10 Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water.

How does a person know the gift of God? How does a person know of Jesus? Through the scriptures.

And this living water is the Holy Spirit.

John 7:37 In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink.
38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

Notice a person must believe to receive the Holy Ghost.

 

Paul is speaking in a polarized fashion and contrasting the time before and after Christ. Obviously people lived under the law by faith prior to Christ, but he's been contrasting faith with the law. Here he refers to the present age as this faith (NIV). Another time he says "from faith to faith" to say the same thing about the change that has taken place.

 

Old Regular said:

Well Charles Finney disagreed with Calvinism, as did John Wesley. In modern times, John R. Rice disagreed with Calvinism.

And you cannot lump everyone who disagrees with Calvinism an Arminian. I am sure if you compared the writings of Finney, Wesley, and Rice which I named above you would find significant differences between them in some areas.

 

Charles Finney was a full-blown heretic -- Pelagian to the core.

John Wesley was a full-tilt Arminian. He even published his own Arminian magazine. He was an anti-Calvinist if there ever was one.

He didn't even know what Calvinism was. He just lumped all Calvinists into one ball and dubbed them Hyper-Calvinists -- as a number on the BB do today.

As I said, Finney was a Pelagian. Wesley and Co. were Semi-Pelagian to Arminian in their theology.

Yes, there were some differences between the latter two -- but they had a lot more in common doctrinally.

 

No, none stoop to that level.

 

Never mind Bob....

I'm sure you did Bob. This is what must people would call a joke. There is no need to reply to a joke, unless you have a better one.

 

WHAT?? Are you kidding me? You think Finney is one to follow? You need to do some study on this. Finney was a heretic!!

Which was Arminian and said so himself.

Although i disagree with Wesley in many areas and I disagreed with Rice on somethings, I feel Finney should not even be in this list of godly men. He was not Arminian, but far south of that.

 

I don't follow Finney or anyone else. Old Regular said he didn't know of anyone of Spurgeon's stature who were Arminian. So I mentioned Finney, Wesley and Rice.

You are reading into my answer something I never said.