Justification by faith alone

[JIM]

Well Greetings old friend. When I saw this I had to say something, or else, you would think that you are correct.

Jim, it is not difficult to understand as long as a person's soteriology puts the crown upon Christ's head, and do not try to share the glory that belongs only to him.

Jim, faith is the evidence of legal justification secured by Christ's obedience alone. Since faith is a work~per Matthew 23:23; and 1st John 3:23; and etc. James is decarling without such, a man's faith (so-called) is no better than the devils that at least believe and tremble.

So, do you see as James would ask, how a man is justified by works (any work which a man has an active part in,) and not by faith alone which is the system under which God has placed us under to reveal to our conscience (Romans 5:1) and others (James 2) that we are indeed children of God's free grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ's faith and obedience, which legally justifies before the law of God.

All of that comes from your confusion about the work that Paul is talking about when he says "not by works". In Paul's use of the term works, he means "works of law" as opposed to" something that is done". Breathing is something we do, but that has nothing to do with work as Paul uses the term. Believing is something we do, but again, that has nothing to do with work as Paul uses the term.

And it also comes from your lack of understanding about when faith even is. Since faith is, as you say, evidence of "legal" justification and you declare that we are justified by the faith of Jesus Christ, that means that Jesus' "faith" is evidence of His legal justification? But of course that is nonsense. On so many occasions in the past I have asked you do define and describe the "faith OF Jesus" with a scriptural definition of faith. You have never ever done so. With good reason, since the very notion of faith as " the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen" (Heb 11:1) attributed to Jesus Christ is an oxymoron.

 

[Carbon]

While justification by faith alone is an important doctrine of the church, I diagree with the statement that it is the article of faith by which the church stands or falls. Surely such a claim belongs only to the gospel message itself -

You disagree with being justified by faith as what the church stands or falls on? Through regeneration, receiving the gift of faith so we can now believe, and because of this belief, as Abraham was declared just, we are, and this is what the church stands or falls on. Jesus said himself that this is what he will build his church on.

Listen to what he says.
Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matthew 16.

that through the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ we have forgiveness of sins? It is the crucifixion itself around which everything moves, around which the whole of history turns. No other doctrine comes close to this.

 

[Carbon]

It is the crucifixion itself around which everything moves, around which the whole of history turns. No other doctrine comes close to this.

I agree Christ is the central figure.

If Christ was not sacrificed and our sins were not imputed unto him at the cross and his righteousness wasn’t imputed unto us; and if the Spirit didn’t regenerate applying it unto us, there would be no justification by faith alone.

 

[JIM]

You disagree with being justified by faith as what the church stands or falls on?

No.

Listen to what he says.
Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matthew 16.

You ain't Peter.

 

[Carbon]

No.

Glad to hear that

You ain't Peter.

Thanks for reminding me.

 

[Mikeuk]

The problem is what the word "faith" entails. It is not nearly as simple as protestants portray. It is complicated
I shall avoid the obvious reference in James - the only verse containing the words "faith" and "alone" together specifically rejects faith alone!
A slight problem for those who say faith alone.

Let us start with gospel. What does scripture equip you to do?

Protestants are fond of quoting 2 tim 3:17 to defend sola scriptura, even though it does not come close to supporting it.
What they fail to quote is the end of the verse!!!
"that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" So Jesus thinks works are important. He says "every work" not just preaching. Like feeding the hungry and clothing the poor....

Are works just automatic consequence of faith?
Luke 11:28 "Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it.”

It is far stronger than that in John . The opposite of "believe" is "disobey" John 3:36

So in sheep and goats those who did the works he asked were saved, 25:34 and those who did not were condemned 25:41
So to obey and do the works our Lord asks , does matters to salvation!.

And are works just baggage from faith, what is measured is faith? The spirit says no!
Revelations 14:13 Then I heard a voice from heaven saying to me, “Write: ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.’ ” “Yes,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.” It doesnt say their "faith follows them"

So what can we make of this?
The answer is - whilst no amount of good works are sufficient to save, so it is not salvation by works, but they matter.
Jesus asks us to do many works, and faith or not, you have a choice every day whether you do them.
But to fail to obey is to disbelieve, so says John. Thats why one section of Lutheranism reach accord with the Holy see, on a meaning of faith as "formed faith" including charity.
And on that basis the see agreed an accord with part of Lutheranism.

Do we need to over think it all? In my view most of what I see on this topic is overthinking a direct command! Obedience matters most.

The bible would be only one line long if all that matters was "confess Jesus is Lord" ,saved from that day on, and nothing else matters, as some of our protestant friends would tell us! I am not sure how many support that view, but they are taking a massive risk if they do!

What divides catholics from protestants in many ways is the "either" "or" mentality of protestants, where catholics have a "both and" mentality. We do not take divinity degrees to decide whether we need to do any of it., or decide which bits are optional, or decide which bits flow as consequence of others. We just try to do what we are told! By those who "were sent" to preach.

We know faith is a struggle ever day, sin is a struggle every day, and we have free will to either do or not do what we are asked, so we fail repeatedly, dust ourselves down, confess , repent, show true contrition at having offended, and try again......again.

But we try to do all we are asked. Including works of charity.
So my question for all is why analyse the theology of sheep and goats?

Why not just do what you are told out of obedience, and look for opportunities to do it?
"For what you do to the least of these, you do for me"
You do not need to know why or analyse theology.
You do know you were told you must....and we have the reassurance that

Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on.’ ”
“Yes,” says the Spirit, “that they may rest from their labors, and their works follow them.”.

We are saved by grace , but woe betide those who spend their lives arguing whether they should do what Jesus asks, or whether they are just robots if they do. Many seem to spend more time worrying about catholic salvation than their own! They judge others, which they are absolutely told not to do!!! The protestants attacking us on forums are like the pharisee in the synagogue stating how they do "faith properly" unlike us the "publican" who does it all wrong (in their view) . We admit, we are the publican who all he can do is hang his head in shame.

We merit so little even in faith, all we can do is obey....and then hope for grace.

 

[Ladodgers6]

My reference to James' declaration in 2:17 really had nothing to do with the definition of justification. My point was and is that there is no statement anywhere in the NT, or in the whole Bible, that justification, whatever be the definition, is by faith alone. Therefore. the very concept must be a formulation of a doctrine that simply does not appear in the text anywhere.

I beg to differ. Romans 4:1 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:​

7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven,
and whose sins are covered;
8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.”​

Now notice in verse 5, Paul says, to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness. And again, David says, blessing of the one whom God counts righteousness apart from works! So, basically it means that there is nothing we can provide God to merit any favor and gain salvation through any works we do. Why? because all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God and are under the curse of God. All sinners, are condemned because of sin, and sin reigns in death and punishment. This is why Christ had to come in the flesh being born under the Law, to fulfill the Law (by doing so, he fulfills the Covenant, that the first Adam breached by disobedience. Which by Christ fulfilling by perfect holiness, and condemning sin in the flesh. He clothes those who believe in his white robes of righteousness, and condemns their sin, in his flesh by our sins being transferred to him. And by this double imputation, Christ receives our sins, and we receive his righteousness, that removes the curse from us and is placed upon him. And his righteousness given to us, give us entrance and reconciliation; the relationship is restored with the Father, then and only then can we live to God in holiness.

All of this is by Grace Alone through Faith Alone, that it is Christ and merits that saves, not anything we do or could do! This is why the "Alone" comes in, meaning it's by God Alone, that he saves while we were dead and his enemies, and it is in this condition that he shows us Mercy!​

 

[Eleanor]

My reference to James' declaration in 2:17 really had nothing to do with the definition of justification. My point was and is that there is no statement anywhere in the NT, or in the whole Bible, that justification, whatever be the definition, is by faith alone. Therefore. the very concept must be a formulation of a doctrine that simply does not appear in the text anywhere.

No offense, but just how much of the NT have you actually read, or do you just take someone else's word for it?

First of all, the definition of justification = a declaration of "not guilty," a sentence of acquittal, a legal finding of right standing with the Court; i.e., debt paid, time served, free to go.
Justification is a forensic righteousness, a positional good standing with God's justice.

Ac 13:39 - "Through him everyone who believes is justified from everything they could not be justified from by the law of Moses."

Ro 3:20-21 - "no one will be declared righteous (justification) in his sight by observing the law. . .a righteousness (justification) from God, apart from law

Ro 3:28 - "justified by faith apart from observing the law"

Ro 4:2 - "If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about "
(God excludes works so that no one can boast - Eph 2:9, 1 Co 1:29).

Gal 2:16 - " know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ."

Gal 3:11 - "Clearly no one is justified before God by the law, because 'The righteous will live by faith.' (Hab 2:4) "

 

[Ladodgers6]

Michael Horton and the Whitehorseinn.org cast expose N.T. Wright's teaching. Please, check it out. Oddly enough Wright got his teaching from E.P. Sanders and D.G Dunn, but ironically they all differ from each other. Including on some very crucial topics. Whereas the Reformers were in 100% consensus on very crucial topics. Justification by Faith Alone, Solas, Grace Alone, sin, the fall, etc.​

@Carbon @Arial @Manfred @ReverendRV

Know what you believe and why you believe it.

 

[Eleanor]

All of that comes from your confusion about the work that Paul is talking about when he says "not by works". In Paul's use of the term works, he means "works of law" as opposed to" something that is done".

Actually, Paul excludes all meritorious work from justification, so that man cannot rob God of his glory (Isa 42:8, 48:11) in boasting (Ro 4:2,
1 Co 1:29, Eph 2:9).

Breathing is something we do, but that has nothing to do with work as Paul uses the term. Believing is something we do, but again, that has nothing to do with work as Paul uses the term.

And it also comes from your lack of understanding about when faith even is. Since faith is, as you say, evidence of "legal" justification and you declare that we are justified by the faith of Jesus Christ, that means that Jesus' "faith" is evidence of His legal justification? But of course that is nonsense. On so many occasions in the past I have asked you do define and describe the "faith OF Jesus" with a scriptural definition of faith. You have never ever done so. With good reason, since the very notion of faith as " the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen" (Heb 11:1) attributed to Jesus Christ is an oxymoron.

 

[Ladodgers6]

Actually, Paul excludes all meritorious work from justification, so that man cannot rob God of his glory (Isa 42:8, 48:11) in boasting (Ro 4:2,
1 Co 1:29, Eph 2:9).

Amen sister! How can a sinner boast in anything before God, right? The Tax Collector (Luke 18) knew that he was a sinner before God, and couldn't even lift his eyes toward the heaven because of the shame and guilt he felt. The Pharisee on the other hand accused everyone else of being sinners, except himself. He relied on his works, tithing, fasting, praying and the Tax Collector was the one who went home justified!​

 

[Arial]

Michael Horton and the Whitehorseinn.org cast expose N.T. Wright's teaching. Please, check it out. Oddly enough Wright got his teaching from E.P. Sanders and D.G Dunn, but ironically they all differ from each other. Including on some very crucial topics. Whereas the Reformers were in 100% consensus on very crucial topics. Justification by Faith Alone, Solas, Grace Alone, sin, the fall, etc.​

@Carbon @Arial @Manfred @ReverendRV

Know what you believe and why you believe it.

Will watch the video when I get time.

 

[makesends]

I agree Christ is the central figure.

If Christ was not sacrificed and our sins were not imputed unto him at the cross and his righteousness wasn’t imputed unto us; and if the Spirit didn’t regenerate applying it unto us, there would be no justification by faith alone.

*I mean this post as a humorous side-comment, (I say, just in case it sounds like disagreement or reprimand or something—it is not.)


Agreed. But here we see the way TULIP etc ties together. Not only is it true that if one part fails the whole thing falls, but if any part is true, it involves all the others.

We say this, or that, if not true, means that OUR particular focus of the moment is not true. Reminds me of an objection against the five solas: "If there are 5, how are any of them "sola"?

One of my favorite "tag-team" partners from a religion forum —a couple years ago, now, I think— used to jab at each other for lack of good opponents: "It's his Omnipotence that logically requires all the rest of his attributes!" "No, it's his being First Cause!" We both knew very well, God's Sovereignty implies his Omnipotence, neither of which are possible if he is not First Cause.

The human mind is funny. A bit noisy, but, funny.

 

[Arial]

Justification is the pronouncement of a judge, sanctification bears an ethical character. Justification takes place wholly outside of us in the court of heaven

If this were not so it could never be said, as it is in Hebrews 4, Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy and find grace to help in time of need. For sinful man can not so much as touch what is holy let alone come before His throne.

 

[Sereni-tea]

You disagree with being justified by faith as what the church stands or falls on? Through regeneration, receiving the gift of faith so we can now believe, and because of this belief, as Abraham was declared just, we are, and this is what the church stands or falls on. Jesus said himself that this is what he will build his church on.

Listen to what he says.
Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” And they said, “Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven. And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matthew 16.

Yes, I disagree. I agree that the doctrine is important - very important. But so are many others. How do you put one above the other?

I would agree that in the time of the Reformation, the doctrine of justification by faith was the most important doctrine. It was where the battle was fought. The other doctrine - the incarnation, the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Trinity and so on, The RCC agreed with. So the battle wasn't fought there. But the doctrine of justification by faith was where they differed. So in this context I would agree with the statement.

However, that was 500 years ago and the Protestant and RCC churches were the result. The challenges the church faces today are very different - the battleground has moved. What are these challenges? I think they are a lot more varied than during the reformation, but I know the one thing that is currently spitting my denomination worldwide and it's not justification by faith. There is an epidemic in the church today of liberalism - watering down the Gospel message, focussing on 'love' and ignoring the seriousness of sin and the justice of God, abandonning the authority of Scripture and following (and justifying) their own desires - in other words, the doctrine of the cross and the doctrine of the authority of Scripture. This is our battle today.

 

[ReverendRV]

Yes, I disagree. I agree that the doctrine is important - very important. But so are many others. How do you put one above the other?

I would agree that in the time of the Reformation, the doctrine of justification by faith was the most important doctrine. It was where the battle was fought. The other doctrine - the incarnation, the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Trinity and so on, The RCC agreed with. So the battle wasn't fought there. But the doctrine of justification by faith was where they differed. So in this context I would agree with the statement.

However, that was 500 years ago and the Protestant and RCC churches were the result. The challenges the church faces today are very different - the battleground has moved. What are these challenges? I think they are a lot more varied than during the reformation, but I know the one thing that is currently spitting my denomination worldwide and it's not justification by faith. There is an epidemic in the church today of liberalism - watering down the Gospel message, focussing on 'love' and ignoring the seriousness of sin and the justice of God, abandonning the authority of Scripture and following (and justifying) their own desires - in other words, the doctrine of the cross and the doctrine of the authority of Scripture. This is our battle today.

The 5-Solas as a Category are a good place to start when it comes to a list of subjects that are major battlefields. Of course there is Faith Alone, but the many years I spent at CARM make me want to say Grace Alone is the biggest Battlefield; especially when Calvinists talk about things. At CARM I used to say that Calvinists love Sola Fide as much as Sola Gratia; but at CARM they were too busy defending Grace that it seems we're Hyper when we're not. A good example of what I'm talking about is the current debate on the New Paul Perspective here, and our harping on how important Justification through Faith Alone is. Now we're focusing on the Faith Battlefield...

But if there were an official vote on the biggest Battlefield, it would be Faith Alone because of the Reformation...

 

[Carbon]

Yes, I disagree.

Okay

I agree that the doctrine is important - very important. But so are many others. How do you put one above the other?

I put the correct gospel above all else. And there are many things tied into it.

I would agree that in the time of the Reformation, the doctrine of justification by faith was the most important doctrine. It was where the battle was fought. The other doctrine - the incarnation, the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Trinity and so on, The RCC agreed with. So the battle wasn't fought there. But the doctrine of justification by faith was where they differed. So in this context I would agree with the statement.

However, that was 500 years ago and the Protestant and RCC churches were the result. The challenges the church faces today are very different - the battleground has moved. What are these challenges? I think they are a lot more varied than during the reformation, but I know the one thing that is currently spitting my denomination worldwide and it's not justification by faith. There is an epidemic in the church today of liberalism - watering down the Gospel message, focussing on 'love' and ignoring the seriousness of sin and the justice of God, abandonning the authority of Scripture and following (and justifying) their own desires - in other words, the doctrine of the cross and the doctrine of the authority of Scripture. This is our battle today.

Justification by faith along, the imputation of our sins on Christ and his righteousness unto us, Christ enduring the Father’s wrath in our place; how can there be something more important?

If you take any of these away, you no longer have a Christian gospel of grace.

And yes, all of Christianity is attacked. But we must have the gospel correct, we need that solid ground to stand on.

If someone teaches we have to keep ourselves justified by our obedience, and Christ does not impute his righteousness then what difference does the rest make? Christ is the central figure. And it is from him our three enemies want to part with.

 

[Arial]

Yes, I disagree. I agree that the doctrine is important - very important. But so are many others. How do you put one above the other?

To say that justification by faith alone is the doctrine on which the church stands or falls, is not putting that doctrine above any other doctrine. The doctrines flow into one another because they flow out of the Bible. In the doctrine of justification through faith alone of the Reformation is our sins imputed to Jesus and His righteousness imputed to the believer. Faith alone was always and is always still the doctrine on which the church stands or falls.

Why? If you remove that doctrine you remove what Jesus accomplished on the cross. You remove Is 53 from the Bible.

I would agree that in the time of the Reformation, the doctrine of justification by faith was the most important doctrine. It was where the battle was fought. The other doctrine - the incarnation, the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Trinity and so on, The RCC agreed with. So the battle wasn't fought there. But the doctrine of justification by faith was where they differed. So in this context I would agree with the statement.

It is not just about the battlefield of the Reformation. The importance of the doctrine of justification by faith alone and with it double imputation, stands today exactly where it stood 500 year ago. And if the church were not still fighting that same battle we would not have NP and the prolific works of Wright on the subject. Wright takes away the double imputation, yet gives lip service to justification by faith alone that includes imputation of our sin to Christ and His righteousness imputed to us, then redefines what the gospel is and what Paul meant by justification. He takes the truth that is in the Bible and places it's interpretation in the hands of, "historical evidence" on Judaism. And his arguments against the Reformed view of justification, the work of Jesus in His life and death, penal substitution, imputed righteousness, are based on an assumption that is not even true.

That being that the Reformers, and those today who agree with their position on these subjects, are entirely focused on "How do I get saved?" We need to see the big picture, Wright says, not the narrow one of the Reformation.

However how do I get saved was not the focus of the Reformation. It was the person and work of Christ. Who is He. What did He do? Why did He do it? How did He do it? For us. And any works written by the Reformers will show that they always, always had the big picture in mind. As do I would say do probably most of those who agree with the teachings of the Reformation. We know we are strangers in this world on our journey Home, with the certain hope of the restoration of all things.

 

[Eleanor]

Yes, I disagree. I agree that the doctrine is important - very important. But so are many others. How do you put one above the other?

I would agree that in the time of the Reformation, the doctrine of justification by faith was the most important doctrine. It was where the battle was fought. The other doctrine - the incarnation, the death and resurrection of Jesus, the Trinity and so on, The RCC agreed with. So the battle wasn't fought there. But the doctrine of justification by faith was where they differed. So in this context I would agree with the statement.

However, that was 500 years ago and the Protestant and RCC churches were the result. The challenges the church faces today are very different - the battleground has moved. What are these challenges? I think they are a lot more varied than during the reformation, but I know the one thing that is currently spitting my denomination worldwide and it's not justification by faith. There is an epidemic in the church today of liberalism - watering down the Gospel message, focussing on 'love' and ignoring the seriousness of sin and the justice of God, abandonning the authority of Scripture and following (and justifying) their own desires - in other words, the doctrine of the cross and the doctrine of the authority of Scripture. This is our battle today.

But in terms of the NT itself, the most important doctrine is salvation through faith, not by works (Eph 2:8-9), right?

 

[Red Baker]

All of that comes from your confusion about the work that Paul is talking about when he says "not by works".

Jim, nice try, but that is simply not so.

First, I'm not confuse as to what Paul meant by works, or works of the law, either one, they mean the same. Works/works of the law as defined by God's word is any work whereby man has an "active part in"~ coming from man.

In Paul's use of the term works, he means "works of law" as opposed to" something that is done".

Not as opposed~that's your added take, in order to slip work in on man's part, into salvation from sin and condemnation. Salvation is of the Lord, totally, or else, man could share the glory.

Breathing is something we do, but that has nothing to do with work as Paul uses the term. Believing is something we do, but again, that has nothing to do with work as Paul uses the term.

Jim, we are not talking about breathing, sleeping and eating, etc. So, do not try that route of slipping works into the equation.

Now, believing is a spiritual acts, and not one things on a spiritual level earns us salvation.

Besides, faith is the results of the new man that Christ our surety secured for us, and THAT FAITH was his faith, since we were IN HIM from all eternity. This is a mystery of Christ, that those who seek to be accepted by their own work, cannot see, nor understand. No pun intended, but truth is truth.

And it also comes from your lack of understanding about when faith even is

I know what faith is, per Hebrews 11. Such faith is God's gift to his elect on Christ's behalf. Philippians 1:29.

Since faith is, as you say, evidence of "legal" justification and you declare that we are justified by the faith of Jesus Christ

"Our faith" is the evidence of our free justification? yes indeed! But, our personal faith which comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God is at best mixed with sin and unbelief.

you declare that we are justified by the faith of Jesus Christ, that means that Jesus' "faith" is evidence of His legal justification?

That is your manner of mocking a blessed truth of free justification~nevertheless, since you ask, I'll tell you~Jesus' perfect life of obedience and faith proved that he was indeed the Son of the Living God and not part of Adam's posterity! Romans 1:4

On so many occasions in the past I have asked you do define and describe the "faith OF Jesus" with a scriptural definition of faith. You have never ever done so. With good reason

I have, you just refused thear me, or, I should say the Spirit's testimony. Jesus as the Son of man came in the likeness of sinful flesh FOR SIN and CONDEMNED sin in the flesh, by a life of perfect obedience and faith~there, what are you going to say about thsi testimony form God's word? The second Adam did what the first Adam could not do, OBEY PERFECTLY in human flesh, and became a perfect offering for the sins of his people.

With good reason, since the very notion of faith as " the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen" (Heb 11:1) attributed to Jesus Christ is an oxymoron.

Then sir, you truly do not understand the gospel of Jesus Christ, and such scriptures as Romans 5:12-19! and many, many more scriptures.