Jesus still had to physically die as our sin bearer, and take te wrath of God for the sin debt...
Forensic Justification of sinners!
Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Yeshua1, Feb 3, 2017.
Page 4 of 8
-
-
-
-
Unless you are saying that Jesus came to obey the Ten Commandments so that God could attribute that to us then I believe we agree for the most part. I believe that Jesus submitting to God's will (entirely) not only fulfilled the Mosaic Law but also also God's law (moral, covenant, all revelation and will of God) as a whole. -
-
-
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Jesus could have refrained from non-compliance with the Law by not becoming man. Jesus did not lay down his life in obedience to the Ten Commandments. Jesus lat down his life in submission to the Father. And yes, all Christ did was by faith, by submission to God (this is faith/belief).
We either submit to God's will in faith through the Spirit or we act in rebellion on our own accord. Jesus did the former, thereby fulfilling the Law.
I hope you see the difference. If we love God we will keep His commands. This does not mean that we keep his commandments in order to love Him. -
As a man Jesus did not seek his own will but by faith he subjected himself to the will of God. This was by the power of the Spirit. All of the Law (not only the Ten Commandments, not only all of the moral aspects of the Law, but all of the Law as a whole) was fulfilled in Christ. Not because Jesus sought to do the Law but because Jesus was submissive to God. Jesus did not go down the list thinking "don't steal, don't kill, don't commit adultry, etc.". Jesus loved God, was faithful to God, and obeyed God.
And then we have us. By faith in Christ we are justified. But we are also, if this faith is true, obedient. And we do not seek our will but Christ's will. And we are obedient even to death, even to bearing our crosses daily and dying to the flesh so as to live in Christ. And this is how we are considered to be justified - in Christ. -
-
-
-
-
How is that not clear? Do you also reject the idea that our obedience is a product of faith?
What I am saying is that Jesus lived the life of faith we should have lived. His eyes were on God, therefore he fulfilled all of the Law.
God is immutable. Jesus was not righteous because he perfectly obey the Ten Commandments. Jesus fulfilled the Law because he is righteous. -
And we obey God because we love and him and desire to please and erve Him, not aworks. bu love relationship! -
The problem with the church today is that God rests to lightly upon her. We want something easy, something simple. We want a Christ who came to obey the Ten Commandments for us, and attribute that obedience on our account so we are free. We want easy believism. But instead the Bible gives us a Christ who as man submit to God. Scripture gives us a Christ that does not do his will but through the spirit does the will of God. and this Christ is obedient even to death, even the death of a cross. And easy believism reject this Christ in favor of a savior who merely comes and obeys the Ten Commandments because if the Christ of the Bible is true then the Christian faith demands something of us. If the Christ of the Bible is true that we are to take up our cross daily and follow him. Is scripture is true then in faith we are to deny our will, that is the will of the flesh, and follow Christ. We are to have the mind of Christ in us. And if this is true then faith is trust and submission to God through Christ. And we must die to the flesh in order to live in Christ.
And this is the problem people have with the truth that Christ work of salvation was one of submission to the Father through the Spirit, thereby fulfilling the Ten Commandments and the Law as a whole. It means they too must take up their crosses and follow him. -
-
-
Within Reformed Theology this topic has been debated, largely on exactly what is reckoned to the believer. To what extent is this attributed righteousness obedientia active and to what extend is it obedientia passive. Luther seems to have leaned towards passive obedience while Calvin seems to have leaned towards (if not specifically arrived at) active obedience. But even with Calvin (and it is debatable to what extent he moved from passive obedience) this was the active ministry of Christ (and obedience to God’s law) in the Son’s submission to the Father (what you are rejecting).
In other words, while your view is not traditionally the view of the Reformers or of Calvinists, I do understand how it could be viewed as a "hyper" or neo-Calvinistic view as it denies obedientia passive all together and restricts obedientia active to Christ's obedience to the Ten Commandments. On the other hand, your basis is not the faithful obedience of Christ to the Father but Jesus' obedience to the Ten Commandments, so I am not sure that it can even truly be considered a hyper view of Calvinism either. -
Martin Marprelate Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Page 4 of 8