What are our implications by "unresurrected flesh", as concerning the fallen / 'old man'?

[Arial]

Of what sin were they guilty when there was no law to sin against to cause their deaths (Ro 6:23)?

The law of sin and death. God law. He is the law, we are created creatures created in his image and likeness. Bearers of his moral image. That is law for his creatures. To bear his image. It does not need to be a written Law or a spoken law as in the Decalogue or the Sinai Law.

Gen 4:3-12
Gen 11:3-9
Gen 6:1-11

Those instances of judgment were not according to the imputed sin of Adam only, but according to what they did. Sin against God.

I have yet to see this addressed. Maybe it was, but not when I presented it, so if it was, please indulge me.

 

[Eleanor]

I had thought before doing that you might have responded to post 114 which I wrote, directly to you.
Post 114
However, I'm content leaving that aside and thank you for acknowledging personal sin (Post #124). I also regret my frustration (Post #120 and #122) and offer a brief exegesis of Romans 5:12-19, tying to the “unresurrected flesh,” to clarify my view.
Romans 5:12-19
Exegesis:
V. 12: “Sin came into the world through one man” (hamartia eisēlthen). Adam’s sin brought death, and “all sinned” (eph’ hō pantes hēmarton) includes imputed guilt (Romans 5:17, logizomai, “reckoned”) and personal sin, as hēmarton suggests collective sinning.

Romans 5 Calvin's Commentaries

V. 13-14: “Sin was in the world” (hamartia ēn en tō kosmō), but “not counted” (ellogeitai) without law. Death reigned over those “not sinning in the likeness of Adam” (mē hamartēsantes), meaning their sins differed from Adam’s (Genesis 2:17), yet they sinned via a corrupt nature (Psalm 51:5, chet). Romans 2:14-15 (suneidēsis, conscience) shows accountability (Genesis 4:7).

Having a corrupt nature is not a sin.
Sin is transgression of the law (1 Jn 3:4), of which there was none until Moses.
The sin that was in the world before Moses was the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17).

V. 15-19: Adam’s sin (paraptōma) imputes death, Christ’s righteousness (dikaiosunē) imputes life to the elect (v. 18), covering imputed and personal sins (Romans 5:16, pollōn paraptōmatōn).

It is God who imputes both the sin of Adam and the righteousness of Christ to individuals.

“Unresurrected Flesh”: The fallen nature (Romans 6:6) from Adam (Ephesians 2:3, phusei) inclines sin, requiring Christ’s atonement (Romans 3:25, hilastērion) and sanctification (Galatians 5:22-23).
Spurgeon noted, “Christ’s cross slays the old man”

The Spurgeon Library | The Old Man Crucified

www.spurgeon.org

I see Romans 5:12 and Romans 2:14-15 showing personal sin with imputation and I’m content to rest here. Does this help to better outline my position?

Ro 5:13 states to the contrary, "Sin is not taken into account when there is no (Mosaic) law."

 

[Eleanor]

I had thought before doing that you might have responded to post 114 which I wrote, directly to you.

Post 114

However, I'm content leaving that aside and thank you for acknowledging personal sin (Post #124). I also regret my frustration (Post #120 and #122) and offer a brief exegesis of Romans 5:12-19, tying to the “unresurrected flesh,” to clarify my view.

Romans 5:12-19
Exegesis:

V. 12: “Sin came into the world through one man” (hamartia eisēlthen). Adam’s sin brought death, and “all sinned” (eph’ hō pantes hēmarton) includes imputed guilt (Romans 5:17, logizomai, “reckoned”) and personal sin, as hēmarton suggests collective sinning.

Romans 5 Calvin's Commentaries

V. 13-14: “Sin was in the world” (hamartia ēn en tō kosmō), but “not counted” (ellogeitai) without law. Death reigned over those “not sinning in the likeness of Adam” (mē hamartēsantes), meaning their sins differed from Adam’s (Genesis 2:17), yet they sinned via a corrupt nature (Psalm 51:5, chet). Romans 2:14-15 (suneidēsis, conscience) shows accountability (Genesis 4:7).

Having a corrupt nature is not a sin.
Sin is transgression of the law (1 Jn 3:4).

V. 15-19: Adam’s sin (paraptōma) imputes death, Christ’s righteousness (dikaiosunē) imputes life to the elect (v. 18), covering imputed and personal sins (Romans 5:16, pollōn paraptōmatōn).

“Unresurrected Flesh”: The fallen nature (Romans 6:6) from Adam (Ephesians 2:3, phusei) inclines sin, requiring Christ’s atonement (Romans 3:25, hilastērion) and sanctification (Galatians 5:22-23).

Spurgeon noted, “Christ’s cross slays the old man”

The Spurgeon Library | The Old Man Crucified

www.spurgeon.org

I see Romans 5:12 and Romans 2:14-15 showing personal sin with imputation and I’m content to rest here. Does this help to better outline my position?

 

[Hazelelponi]

Having a corrupt nature is not a sin.

So basically if we really really wanted to be good to people we should just not tell them about Jesus, that way God won't judge their sin if they aren't saved.

They get a pass and escape God's judgement for sin if we just never tell them about their sin.

Doesn't matter if a person's saved then .. this whole Christianity thing has nothing to do with a righteous God judging sin.

 

[Eleanor]

The law of sin and death. God law.

They were guilty of the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 12-16).

Ro 5:12-21 is the summary of the imputation of sin and righteousness.

He is the law, we are created creatures created in his image and likeness. Bearers of his moral image. That is law for his creatures. To bear his image. It does not need to be a written Law or a spoken law as in the Decalogue or the Sinai Law.

Gen 4:3-12
Gen 11:3-9
Gen 6:1-11

Those instances of judgment were not according to the imputed sin of Adam only, but according to what they did. Sin against God.

I have yet to see this addressed. Maybe it was, but not when I presented it, so if it was, please indulge me.

 

[Eleanor]

So basically if we really really wanted to be good to people we should just not tell them about Jesus, that way God won't judge their sin if they aren't saved.

They get a pass and escape God's judgement for sin if we just never tell them about their sin.

Doesn't matter if a person's saved then .. this whole Christianity thing has nothing to do with a righteous God judging sin.

Sin is transgression of a command.

Having a corrupt nature is not a sin, not a transgression of a command.

 

[Eleanor]

I had thought before doing that you might have responded to post 114 which I wrote, directly to you.

Post 114



However, I'm content leaving that aside and thank you for acknowledging personal sin (Post #124). I also regret my frustration (Post #120 and #122) and offer a brief exegesis of Romans 5:12-19, tying to the “unresurrected flesh,” to clarify my view.

Romans 5:12-19
Exegesis:

V. 12: “Sin came into the world through one man” (hamartia eisēlthen). Adam’s sin brought death, and “all sinned” (eph’ hō pantes hēmarton) includes imputed guilt (Romans 5:17, logizomai, “reckoned”) and personal sin, as hēmarton suggests collective sinning.

Romans 5 Calvin's Commentaries

V. 13-14: “Sin was in the world” (hamartia ēn en tō kosmō), but “not counted” (ellogeitai) without law. Death reigned over those “not sinning in the likeness of Adam” (mē hamartēsantes), meaning their sins differed from Adam’s (Genesis 2:17), yet they sinned via a corrupt nature (Psalm 51:5, chet). Romans 2:14-15 (suneidēsis, conscience) shows accountability (Genesis 4:7).

V. 15-19: Adam’s sin (paraptōma) imputes death, Christ’s righteousness (dikaiosunē) imputes life to the elect (v. 18), covering imputed and personal sins (Romans 5:16, pollōn paraptōmatōn).

“Unresurrected Flesh”: The fallen nature (Romans 6:6) from Adam (Ephesians 2:3, phusei) inclines sin, requiring Christ’s atonement (Romans 3:25, hilastērion) and sanctification (Galatians 5:22-23).

Spurgeon noted, “Christ’s cross slays the old man”

The Spurgeon Library | The Old Man Crucified

www.spurgeon.org

I see Romans 5:12 and Romans 2:14-15 showing personal sin with imputation and I’m content to rest here. Does this help to better outline my position?

Sin is not reckoned (counted against them) where there is no law (Ro 5:13, 4:15)

 

[Hazelelponi]

Having a corrupt nature is not a sin, not a transgression of a command

Yes but we speak the words of God to people when we say "repent and turn to the Gospe" or "Repent ye therefore and turn to God"

That's a command of God. WHEN they don't do it, Scripture says:

"There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day" John 12:48

Seems to me your claim is that it will go better for the one who never heard than the one who heard, so to be good Christians we should avoid sharing the Gospel, like the plague if we actually love people.

Since there's no judgement without the command.

 

[Eleanor]

Yes but we speak the words of God to people when we say "repent and turn to the Gospe" or "Repent ye therefore and turn to God"

That's a command of God. WHEN they don't do it, Scripture says:

"There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; the very words I have spoken will condemn them at the last day" John 12:48

Seems to me your claim is that it will go better for the one who never heard than the one who heard, so to be good Christians we should avoid sharing the Gospel, like the plague if we actually love people.

Only heaven knows where you get that notion. . .and they're not tellin'.

Since there's no judgement without the command.

All those of Adam are condemned because of their guilt of the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17), just as all those of Christ are righteous because of their imputed righteousess of Christ (Ro 1:17, 3:21, 4:5, 13, 9:20).
Everything else is additional.

All mankind is born condemned, no matter what they do or how good they are.
Their personal behavior neither mitigates nor increases their condemnation.
That's why Jesus spoke Jn 3:18.

Only one thing removes condemnation for sin; i.e., remission of one's sin through faith in the person and atoning work of Jesus Christ.

 

[Arial]

They were guilty of the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 12-16).

Ro 5:12-21 is the summary of the imputation of sin and righteousness.

You still haven't addressed the content of my post. You simply quoted the same scriptures again. And you did not deal with the scriptures I gave at all.

Sin is transgression of a command.

Having a corrupt nature is not a sin, not a transgression of a command.

Sin is any transgression against God's holiness.
Having a corrupt nature is a sin. Ask God. He sent the first two and all their progeny far, far away from him and the tree of life.

 

[Eleanor]

You still haven't addressed the content of my post. You simply quoted the same scriptures again. And you did not deal with the scriptures I gave at all.

Are you saying the following is not NT teaching?

If it is, I will let you address your own content in light of them.

Sin is any transgression against God's holiness.

When it comes to assigning guilt and penalty, according to the NT, sin is transgression of the law (1 Jn 3:4).

Paul presents sin as the following:

Sin entered the world through one man (Adam's sin of transgressing the law, imputed to all mankind, Ro 5:17)

Where there is no law, there is no sin (against the law by which to assign guilt to man). (Ro 4:15, 5:13)
There was no law between Adam and Moses and, therefore, no sin against the law was charged to mankind during that time.

What was charged to mankind between Adam and Moses, when there was no sin against the law to cause their deaths, was the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 12-14),
which was the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputed righteousness of Christ (Ro 5:18-19, 1:17, 3:21, 4:5, 13).

 

[Eleanor]

You still haven't addressed the content of my post. You simply quoted the same scriptures again. And you did not deal with the scriptures I gave at all.

Sin is any transgression against God's holiness.
Having a corrupt nature is a sin. Ask God. He sent the first two and all their progeny far, far away from him and the tree of life.

The NT is focused on redemption from sin, where all mankind is born with a sinful nature and guilty of the imputed sin of Adam.

 

[Arial]

The NT is focused on redemption from sin, where all mankind is born with a sinful nature and guilty of the imputed sin of Adam.

Relevance?

 

[Arial]

Are you saying the following is not NT teaching?

If it is, I will let you address your own content in light of them.

When it comes to assigning guilt and penalty, according to the NT, sin is transgression of the law (1 Jn 3:4).

Paul presents sin as the following:

Sin entered the world through one man (Adam's sin of transgressing the law, imputed to all mankind, Ro 5:17)

Where there is no law, there is no sin (against the law by which to assign guilt to man). (Ro 4:15, 5:13)
There was no law between Adam and Moses and, therefore, no sin against the law was charged to mankind during that time.

What was charged to mankind between Adam and Moses, when there was no sin against the law to cause their deaths, was the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 12-14),
which was the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputed righteousness of Christ (Ro 5:18-19, 1:17, 3:21, 4:5, 13).

You are wrong! No matter how many hundreds of times you say it.

Over and out.

 

[Eleanor]

You are wrong! No matter how many hundreds of times you say it.

Over and out.

Sorry you don't agree with those Scriptures.

Perhaps a Reformed commentary would help.

 

[Hazelelponi]

All those of Adam are condemned because of their guilt of the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17)

Your view, if extended, risks implying that those ignorant of specific commands face no judgment (#144, #148), which could undermine the urgency of the gospel. In today’s relativistic culture, where sin is dismissed as mere preference.

Only heaven knows where you get that notion. . .and they're not tellin'.

Sister your emphasis on Adam’s imputed sin (Romans 5:17, ESV) and Christ’s righteousness (Romans 5:18-19) is a doctrinal cornerstone.

However I believe my view (#138) on “unresurrected flesh” aligns more fully with Scripture and the historical confessions. The “old man” (Romans 6:6) is a sinful nature, “truly sin” (WCF 6.4) (hyperlinked)

4: From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good,[130] and wholly inclined to all evil,[131] do proceed all actual transgressions.[132]

This is not merely a tendency to transgress (contra #146) Psalm 51:5 (“I was brought forth in iniquity”) and Ephesians 2:3 (“by nature children of wrath”) confirm we’re born corrupt, producing personal sins. While you cite 1 John 3:4 (#143), Calvin notes sin includes “corruption of nature”. Christ bears this nature’s guilt and our deeds 2 Corinthians 5:21) to redeem us. (Hyperlink to Corinthians 5:21)

You stress Romans 5:13 (“sin not counted where there is no law,” #142), but Romans 2:14-15 shows the law written on hearts, holding men accountable pre-Moses (Genesis 4:7, Cain’s sin; Genesis 6:5-11, flood). WCF 4.2 affirms this moral image.

Sister, how do you reconcile Romans 5:13 with Romans 2:14-15 and WCF 6.4?

 

[Arial]

Sorry you don't agree with those Scriptures.

Perhaps a Reformed commentary would help.

You have been given them Eleanor, by a number of people. I suppose it is not that big a deal, since it in no way changes your recognition that all are sinners, all are under the sentence of death and just judgement for it, until and unless they are placed in Christ through faith.

 

[Eleanor]

Your view, if extended, risks implying that those ignorant of specific commands face no judgment (#144, #148), which could undermine the urgency of the gospel. In today’s relativistic culture, where sin is dismissed as mere preference.

All without exception are condemned by the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17), the guilt of which puts all without exception under judgment, at birth.
No one escapes the Judgment.

Sister your emphasis on Adam’s imputed sin (Romans 5:17, ESV) and Christ’s righteousness (Romans 5:18-19) is a doctrinal cornerstone.
However I believe my view (#138) on “unresurrected flesh” aligns more fully with Scripture and the historical confessions. The “old man” (Romans 6:6) is a sinful nature, “truly sin” (WCF 6.4) (hyperlinked)

It's not either/or, it's both/and. . .imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:12, 17) and personal sin, which infants do not have.

4: From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good,[130] and wholly inclined to all evil,[131] do proceed all actual transgressions.[132]

This is not merely a tendency to transgress (contra #146) Psalm 51:5 (“I was brought forth in iniquity”) and Ephesians 2:3 (“by nature children of wrath”) confirm we’re born corrupt, producing personal sins. While you cite 1 John 3:4 (#143), Calvin notes sin includes “corruption of nature”. Christ bears this nature’s guilt and our deeds 2 Corinthians 5:21) to redeem us. (Hyperlink to Corinthians 5:21)

You stress Romans 5:13 (“sin not counted where there is no law,” #142), but Romans 2:14-15 shows the law written on hearts, holding men accountable pre-Moses (Genesis 4:7, Cain’s sin; Genesis 6:5-11, flood). WCF 4.2 affirms this moral image.

The law written on their hearts does not come with death penalty for disobedience.
The difference after the formal proclamation of the law code is the death penalty which was attached.

All of which is redundant. . .for all without exception are condemned from birth by the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 12).

Sister, how do you reconcile Romans 5:13 with Romans 2:14-15 and WCF 6.4?

That's personal transgression, of which infants are not capable, but yet are still condemned, and are by nature objects of wrath (Eph 2:3).

Without having to labor other Scriptures, the unseatable governing principle here is that
all in Adam are condemned by the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 12), which is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputed righteousness of Christ to all in Christ (Ro 5:18-19).

Your view, if extended, risks implying that those ignorant of specific commands face no judgment (#144, #148), which could undermine the urgency of the gospel. In today’s relativistic culture, where sin is dismissed as mere preference.
Sister your emphasis on Adam’s imputed sin (Romans 5:17, ESV) and Christ’s righteousness (Romans 5:18-19) is a doctrinal cornerstone.

However I believe my view (#138) on “unresurrected flesh” aligns more fully with Scripture and the historical confessions. The “old man” (Romans 6:6) is a sinful nature, “truly sin” (WCF 6.4) (hyperlinked)

Ya' got me there! . . .and which is the essential difference between your view and mine; i.e., your view aligns more fully with Scripture than does the Scriptural/doctrinal cornerstone itself (Ro 5:18-19), that being a contradiction of terms (i.e., the very cornerstone itself is inadequate).

Our differences are irreconcilable: doctrine governs your understanding of Scripture, while Scripture governs my understanding of doctrine (Ro 5:18-19).

Are you improving on a doctrinal "cornerstone?"
Are you failing to fully apply the ramifications of the doctrinal cornerstone?
Or are you replacing it with something more suitable to you?

 

[Hazelelponi]

without exception ar

Hey sister, I'm bowing out. We are at an impasse and it's not worth fighting when we have so much love and respect for one another. In the end, it is not that important.

 

[Eleanor]

Grace says we won't be punished if we but ask forgiveness and repent of our sins, but that doesn't remove law, the law is still there.

The law is not of grace. It was given because of transgressions; and it was given so that sin might be revealed as it is - exceedingly sinful. By the law is the knowledge of sin.

That's why Paul called it the Law of the Spirit of Life, there's a law still at work, it's just empowering in function to do the law, instead of accusing in function which is ultimately unhelpful.

The word "law" has a semantic range; and it is used differently, in different contexts. The law of the Spirit of Life means, not a set of statutes (like the ten commandments), but the principle of the Spirit of Life.

Whether by the Administrative Head of Grace, or by the accusatory head of the curse, the one thing that never changed was the law itself.

Christians are dead to the law, because Christ (the embodiment of the law) was nailed to the cross, so that the list of commandments was taken out of the way.

Col. 2:13,14 (WEB)
13 You were dead through your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh. He made you alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,
14 wiping out the handwriting in ordinances which was against us; and he has taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross;

The only thing that changed was the administration of justice and mercy in relation to it.

This is absolutely incorrect.

Rom. 7:3-6
3 So then if, while the husband lives, she is joined to another man, she would be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man.
4 Therefore, my brothers, you also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you would be joined to another, to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit to God.
5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were through the law, worked in our members to bring forth fruit to death.
6 But now we have been discharged from the law, having died to that in which we were held; so that we serve in newness of the spirit, and not in oldness of the letter.

And such were some of you, still today with our flesh we sometimes struggle.

I certainly do. I am struggling with how to take my natural reactions and move them into the category of something I can control as easily as I control matter or space in my dreams. Even while in mid reaction. (Don't be the domino of evil, be the welded steel that cannot fall,).

Yes; but, the way of victory over our sin, is through relationship with the Lord, being led by the Holy Spirit, not by attempting to keep a set of rules, no matter how good those rules might be.

That's the matter and space I need full mastery of, myself, even though we are under Grace we need to see what law is, not to go back into ignorance of good and evil, but to go forward in our mastery over evil

The law was a slave tutor, to lead us to Christ; however, now that we are in Christ, we are freed from the law, to live to another - the resurrected Lord.

The law is the tree Adam and Eve ate from, the knowledge of good and evil.
.the healing is Grace, the healing is the Tree of Life.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil is what gave man a conscience. It was not about knowledge of a set of statutes.

The Tree of Life represents a few things, including wisdom (see the verses immediately below), but, primarily, it refers to the Lord himself, since he is THE LIFE.

Pro. 3:13,18
13 Happy is the man who finds wisdom, the man who gets understanding.
...
18 She is a tree of life to those who lay hold of her. Happy is everyone who retains her.

But the healing is not erasure. The law is still there, and it's still a tree with good fruit. It causes you to know what is good and what is evil, not to do it.

By the law is knowledge of sin; but, it also stirs up sin and gives no power to overcome it.

Life is what causes us to do it. Grace is the healing from the knowledge.

Wouldn't you think?

A world of frustration is what will happen if you live your life by trying to keep God's laws. Instead of that, seek the Lord in prayer, to cultivate fellowship with him and become more sensitive to the leading of the Holy Spirit. He will always lead you to do what is good in his sight and you won't need the laws to tell you what to do, or not do.

If you go astray (as we all do sometimes), you will hear a word behind you, saying, "This way that you should walk.".

(Post #19)