Featured Non Imputation of sin to God's Elect

jesus death was atonement for those to be saved by God, but until the sinner receives it by faith, its null and void unto him!

 

Try using your head for something other than a hatrack! The elect prior to the cross looked forward to the cross on the basis of "PROMISE" and the promise was based upon God's revealed PURPOSE that He would send the "Christ" predicted, preached and symbolized in the sacrifices (Rom. 3:25). Hence, regenerative faith was applied to the elect prior to the cross by the Holy Spirit on the basis of the promise LEGAL PROVISION FOR JUSTIFICATION. God's PURPOSED justification is not the PROVISION of that justification as the PROVISION is the work of Christ not the work of the Father. Neither is the PROVISION of the legal basis for justification the APPLICATION of justification. You are one thoroughly confused and messed up person theologically.

We look back by faith to the cross as the FULFILLMENT of that promise and the finished provision of that LEGAL BASIS for justification.

You might be there but I won't (Jn. 5:24).

 

The only lie here is between your two ears that keeps flowing out your mouth. I answered your objection completely and you have no other response but to repeat the same nonsense.

 

You still don't get it! Of course the LEGAL BASIS for justification had to be made by Christ or else God's Purpose would have been a lie and thwarted. However, it makes no difference at what time Christ actually provided that legal basis by his life and death as any elect previous to that point in time would have it APPLIED by faith in the PROMISE yet unfilled as much as those after that time would have it APPLIED by faith in promise FULFILLED.

It is not and never will be the Father's purpose or the Son's provision for justification that justifies anyone but the work of the Holy Spirit that makes it APPLICABLE. God's Purpose for justification finds its PROVISION in the Son's work but only finds its implementation/application in the Spirit's work.

You are attempting to make God's Purpose and the Son's provision the actual application thus usurping the work of the Spirit of God. That is precisely why you have NEVER PROVIDED ANY TESTIMONY of your own salvation because you simply do not have one?

 

Boy, you surely don't think things through do you? This text says exactly what I told you.

1. The Father's Purpose - "Christ died for our sins"
2. The Promise - "according to the Scriptures"
3. The provision ' "Christ died"

 

You still don't understand what I said do you?

Christ did provide the LEGAL BASIS for the justification of the elect. He died for the elect - He paid it in full - it is finished, but read carefully now, He did not apply it to the elect - that was not his covenant responsibility. It was not the Father's responsibility. That responsibility was the sole work of the Holy Spirit - period! Hence, what Christ provided in full was the LEGAL BASIS for justification and the Father purposed it and accepted it for the elect. However, its application is the work of the Holy Spirit.

You have no concept of the trinue eternal covenant of redemption. If you had a clue you would not be isolating the covenant committment of the Father and claiming it stands sufficient alone and thus we were actually justified in eternity. If you had any clue you would not be isolating the work of the Son and presenting as standing alone and sufficient by itself. If you had any clue you would not be perverting, usurping the covenant work of the Holy Spirit which is the ACTUAL and LITERAL and LEGAL APPLICATION of what the Father purposed and promised and which the Son provided and fulfilled in his life and death.

Go back to Sunday school and learn the a,b,c's and return with some common sense and Biblical based soteriology.

 

Readers,

The eternal covenant of redemption was a covenant between the triune members of the Godhead wherein each member took on covenant responsibilites in the redemption of the elect.

Any system of interpretation that either isolates one Covenant member and their work from the other two and treats it as complete and sufficient in an of itself fails to understand the INTERDEPENDANT unity between all three members of the Godhead and oneness of the whole. This is the basic error that SBM is committing and that is why he is so confused and his interpretations so erroneous.

Second it is important to understand the covenant responsibility of each Divine Person and not confuse them with the other or make one usurp the other but rather they are a Tri-UNITY in their work but with distinct obligations.

The Father provides the PURPOSE or DESIGN and is responsible for choosing the elect unto that purpose and design (Eph. 1:4; 2 Thes. 2:13; etc.).

The Son provides the purchased price for the elect and thus establishes the LEGAL basis for their regeneration, conversion/justifcation/adoption/sanctification/glorifcation and rewards and He finished that work in His life and death.

The Holy Spirit provides the ACTUAL and LITERAL personal practical and legal application of what the Father purposed and the Son purchased.

This is the second error by SBM. He attempts to usurp the covenant office of the Holy Spirit by attributing His covenant work to both the Father and the Son and that is why he has the rediculous doctrine of actual and literal eternal justification and actual and literal spiritual union before the world began when nothing more exists before the world began but God's PURPOSE which must be implemented in time by the Son and Holy Spirit.

It is this ursupation of the office of the Holy Spirit that forces SMB to deny the explicit and clearly taught Biblical doctrine of "justification by faith."

1. The Father PURPOSED justification - the Plan
2. The Son PROVIDED the legal basis for justification
3. The Spirit APPLIED that basis to the person of the elect

As long as he confuses the Divine Persons and their covenant obligations or usurps the Holy Spirit's work with that of the Father's and the Son's or attempts to make each stand ALONE and INDEPENDENT from the other two he will pervert every scripture he touches and that is precisely what he has done and is currently doing.

 

There is a difference between taking upon the covenant responsibility before the world began and the point in time when He actually fulfilled that responsibility. For example, the Holy Spirit took upon the covenant responsibility to regenerate/covert/justify/sanctify and glorify the elect but He did not fulfill that responsibility before the world began but in time and space. So you are confusing covenant responsibility and covenant fulfillment with each other.

No, that is not the meaning of verse 19. He is not talking about the covenant obligation before the world began but the actual covenant fulfillment by Christ on the cross in time and space. The non-imputation refers to what Christ obtained/finished on the cross LEGALLY and PROVISIONALLY only but Christ did not obtain the actual APPLICATION to the elect as its ACTUAL application is not the work of the Father or the Son but of the Holy Spirit and that is noted in the words "and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation" and in the admonition "be ye reconciled" unto God.

What God obtained in Christ on the cross was the legal basis for non-imputation but NOT the application to the elect as that is the work of the the Holy Spirit in time and space and that is precisely why the "word of reconciliation" and the "ministry of reconciliation" is given unto men as the Holy Spirit applies the finished work of Christ in connection with the preaching of the gospel (which he soverignly empowers as His creative Word to regenerate the elect - Rom. 10:17) "rhema" word of command (2 Cor. 4:6), as that is the good pleasure of God (1 Cor. 1:17-18; 2 Thes. 2:13-14).

God did not obtain "in Christ" on the cross the actual application of non-imputation any more or less than he obtained their regeneration, progressive sanctification or glorification on the cross. He obtained only the legal basis or the fulfillment of Christ's covenant obligation.

Prior to the Cross the Holy Spirit applied it on the basis of God's promise that Christ would provide the legal basis and after the cross the Holy Spirit applied it to the elect due to the fulfillment of that promise:

Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

 

There is a huge difference. Your unbiblical analogy cannot be compared to the Biblical facts.

Here is a better analogy and it is thoroughly Biblical. On the day of atonement there was a sacrifice on the altar and the blood was shed, however, that in itself was not sufficient even though the blood had been shed and the sacrificial act finished. Its blood had to be taken and APPLIED throughout the tabernacle.

No amount of human rationality can make the purpose of God equivilent and inclusive of the actual fulfillment of that purpose as one is the cause while the other is the effect. Neither can any amount of human rationale make either the purpose of God or the fulfilled provisional work of Christ equivilent and inclusive of the ACTUAL APPLICATION of both God's Purpose and Christ's provision.

Isaiah 46:11 clearly denies that purpose equals fulfillment but that is the vain jangling behind your humanized rationalization!

The work on the Cross was finished but High Priestly work in heaven is not finished as it is the application of what was finished by Christ, obtained by Christ and is being applied to the elect.

Justification by faith is the application of both IMPUTATION of righteousness and NON-Imputation of sin as clearly and explicitly spelled out in Romans 4:1-11 in regard to justification by faith which occurred "IN UNCIRCUMCISION" rather than eternity past or on the cross! Your wrong and the reason you are wrong is because you have usurped the scriptures with human rationalization.

 

Your forced, jerked out of context explanation of Romans 4:7-8 is repudiated by Paul in verses 9-10 where he explicitly defines "WHEN" and "HOW" this non-imputation was applied to Abraham! Not before the foundation of the world, not on the cross as that was 2000 years yet distant in the future but "IN CIRCUMCISION" at the exact point he "BELIEVED" (vv. 3, 11).

 

Your only response is to repeat yourself when your repetition is thoroughly repudiated by Paul in the very next verses as seen above and you have no response to that, except FLEE his words.