The Wages of Sin is DEATH

R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
"For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" Romans 6:23.

God commanded Adam not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and then he gave him a warning. "For in the day that you eat of it you will most surely die" Genesis 2:17. When Adam and Eve ate of the tree they both died spiritually. God withdrew his Spirit from them and they both died spiritually. Spiritual death is eternal separation from God. We are all born spiritually dead and separated from God. This is why we need to be born again, 1 Peter 1:23.

Sin is the transgression of God's Holy Law. Paul makes it clear, "That all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23. Paul said that the whole world is guilty because of sin.

"Now we know that whatever the laws says, it says to them that are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped and all of the world may become guilty before God" Romans 3:19.

The whole world is guilty of sin. This is why Jesus had to atone for the sins of the whole world, 1 John 2:2. Because Jesus atoned for the sins of the whole world, it is now possible for anyone, everyone, whosoever, to be saved by doing nothing more than calling on the name of the Lord, Romans 10:13. This is the gift of God. Salvation is not by being predestinated or by joining the Catholic church. Salvation is by the doing and the dying of Jesus Christ. "Whosoever that shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved" Romans 10:13. The Lord is waiting to hear from you.
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
fishrovmen said:
Did Jesus "atone" for the sin of unbelief for all people?
Click to expand...

No one will be saved that does not believe that Jesus atoned for their sins and the sins of the whole world, I John 2:2.

That should answer your question, but knowing you, you will not accept that answer.

Sin and belief are not the same thing.
 
fishrovmen

fishrovmen

Active member
Robert Pate said:
No one will be saved that does not believe that Jesus atoned for their sins and the sins of the whole world, I John 2:2.

That should answer your question, but knowing you, you will not accept that answer.

Sin and belief are not the same thing.
Click to expand...

I accept answers when I find them, even if I don't agree with the answer. I haven't seen an answer to my question if Jesus a toned for the sin of unbelief.
I agree that sin and belief are not the same.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lon
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
fishrovmen said:
I accept answers when I find them, even if I don't agree with the answer. I haven't seen an answer to my question if Jesus a toned for the sin of unbelief.
I agree that sin and belief are not the same.
Click to expand...

There is no scripture that says Jesus atoned for unbelief.

What the scripture does says is, "For God has concluded them ALL in unbelief that he might have mercy on ALL" Romans 11:32.
 
jamie

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
fishrovmen said:
Did Jesus "atone" for the sin of unbelief for all people?
Click to expand...

Yes, one sacrifice for everyone for all time. However, the Father is not calling everyone at this time. Most will be in the second resurrection.
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
jamie said:
Yes, one sacrifice for everyone for all time. However, the Father is not calling everyone at this time. Most will be in the second resurrection.
Click to expand...

All are being called now. The Holy Spirit is in the world calling all to come to Christ.

"Today is the day of salvation" 2 Corinthians 6:2.
 
jamie

jamie

New member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Robert Pate said:
All are being called now. The Holy Spirit is in the world calling all to come to Christ.
Click to expand...

For you see your calling, brethren, that not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called.
(1 Corinthians 1:26)​

Ok, so once again Paul got it wrong. It's a good thing you caught his mistake. If only Paul had known as much as you.

:cow:
 
PneumaPsucheSoma

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
fishrovmen said:
I accept answers when I find them, even if I don't agree with the answer. I haven't seen an answer to my question if Jesus a toned for the sin of unbelief.
I agree that sin and belief are not the same.
Click to expand...

The answer lies in an intricate understanding of articular and anarthrous Greek nouns (and in contrast to English definite and indefinite article nouns). You're asking about a particular act, not sin as a noun.

In 1Corinthians 5:21, scripture clearly indicates Jesus was made (poieo) sin (hamartia, singular anarthrous; NOT singular articular or plural articular/anarthrous). This has direct bearing upon ALL sinning (verb, hamartano) and resulting acts (sins, hamartema).

Atonement can only be understood in light of comprehensive understanding of Greek nouns, without perceiving them as verbs.

A particular individual act of sin is never the appropriate context to address atonement. To even ask means one doesn't have any understanding whatsoever of Hamartiology or Soteriology (the vast majority, BTW).
 
Zeke

Zeke

Well-known member
If you take any of this outside/parabolic symbolism as historic then Luke 17:20-21 hasn't registered with the persona yet, Matt 11:11 in light of Galatians 4:23-28 shows the intent of scripture and the states man goes through 1Cor 15:45, Luke 15:45.

So much for Innocent until proven guilty, Christianity has been duped into Guilty until proven innocent by slick theology and mind control legal wizards.
 
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
PneumaPsucheSoma said:
The answer lies in an intricate understanding of articular and anarthrous Greek nouns (and in contrast to English definite and indefinite article nouns). You're asking about a particular act, not sin as a noun.

In 1Corinthians 5:21, scripture clearly indicates Jesus was made (poieo) sin (hamartia, singular anarthrous; NOT singular articular or plural articular/anarthrous). This has direct bearing upon ALL sinning (verb, hamartano) and resulting acts (sins, hamartema).

Atonement can only be understood in light of comprehensive understanding of Greek nouns, without perceiving them as verbs.

A particular individual act of sin is never the appropriate context to address atonement. To even ask means one doesn't have any understanding whatsoever of Hamartiology or Soteriology (the vast majority, BTW).
Click to expand...
What about that sin I did that one day ?
 
PneumaPsucheSoma

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
patrick jane said:
What about that sin I did that one day ?
Click to expand...

About that one act? The verb? The resulting act as a noun? Or about the singular articular or singular anarthrous noun?

Unfortunately, you're thinking of a noun as a verb without understanding the noun OR the verb. It's an epidemic. There is virtually no modern English speaker who remotely understands Hamartiology.
 
PneumaPsucheSoma

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
Zeke said:
If you take any of this outside/parabolic symbolism as historic then Luke 17:20-21 hasn't registered with the persona yet, Matt 11:11 in light of Galatians 4:23-28 shows the intent of scripture and the states man goes through 1Cor 15:45, Luke 15:45.

So much for Innocent until proven guilty, Christianity has been duped into Guilty until proven innocent by slick theology and mind control legal wizards.
Click to expand...

It's sad you've been duped my Modernism-sculpted contemporary Christianity before having any actual understanding of the authentic Christian Faith apart from historical revisionism, including that which you perpetuate in your own freakish manner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lon
patrick jane

patrick jane

BANNED
Banned
PneumaPsucheSoma said:
About that one act? The verb? The resulting act as a noun? Or about the singular articular or singular anarthrous noun?

Unfortunately, you're thinking of a noun as a verb without understanding the noun OR the verb. It's an epidemic. There is virtually no modern English speaker who remotely understands Hamartiology.
Click to expand...

I was being sarcastic and funny, I understand the meanings whether or not I know what kind of noun
 
PneumaPsucheSoma

PneumaPsucheSoma

TOL Subscriber
patrick jane said:
I was being sarcastic and funny, I understand the meanings whether or not I know what kind of noun
Click to expand...

Yes, I knew you were being sarcastic. My post was for the general readership.

First, the necessary distinction between noun (singular and plural) and verb. Then the vital distinction between articular and anarthrous nouns, both singular and plural.

Not one poster on TOL understands Hamartiology. Sad.
 
R

Robert Pate

Well-known member
Banned
PneumaPsucheSoma said:
Yes, I knew you were being sarcastic. My post was for the general readership.

First, the necessary distinction between noun (singular and plural) and verb. Then the vital distinction between articular and anarthrous nouns, both singular and plural.

Not one poster on TOL understands Hamartiology. Sad.
Click to expand...


I think that you have been hanging out with some of those highly educated Christian scholars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top