Hello again! Unfortunately, as was the case with what you wrote in a previous thread re: covenant headship, I am likewise confused as to what you hold in regard to the nature and efficacy of the atonement. When you say that "Christ redeemed all mankind unto God", what exactly is your understanding of "redeemed"? For if Christ actually paid the ransom (Grk: lutron; cf. Matt 20:28; Mk 10:45; 1Tim 2:6), thus being the Redeemer (Grk: lutroo; cf. Gal 3:13; 1Pet 1:18; cp. Heb: goel in the book of Ruth), then must not the one who held those redeemed captive must legally set them free?
Indeed. When Adam sinned, he took the whole of humanity into a state of separation from God as the covenant head. Therefore, when the Last Adam (1 Corin. 15:45) KEEPS COVENANT with God, and then dies in a substitutionary fashion, I think it is both just and reasonable that God reverse the effects of the Fall in a completely similar manner to the Fall.
I think I have scriptural warrant for this idea also:
Quote
Romans 5:11-21 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
I am sure you will agree with me that when the scriptures here state that "many" are "dead" that this is really stating that ALL MEN (mankind) is born into a state of death, right?
Therefore, if the meaning of the word "many" really has to do with all mankind, then according to the verses following that one, Jesus Christ also died for "many" (all mankind).
And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Note this verse. The free gift came upon ALL MEN unto justification. Whew!!! Wouldn't you agree that this is a pretty "heavy" verse?
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
And here is the verse which really does it for me. By Adam's sin the "many" (which we KNOW to be ALL MANKIND) were made sinners, so by the obedience of Jesus, the LAST ADAM, the "many" (which must also mean ALL MANKIND) are made righteous.
But.....is this righteousness AUTOMATIC as was the automatic sentence of death upon all mankind when Adam fell? I would say no.
We are sinners because of the organic union between our flesh and the flesh of Adam. We are literally "of Adam" in our very being, thus united to Him, we are indeed sinners after his nature.
Therefore, it is necessary to be organically united to the Last Adam to share in that righteousness. This is what salvation is -- being united to Christ Jesus. We do this when we "cut covenant" with Him.
But in regards to the federal and judicial headship of Adam, I thin the above verses prove this: that just as Adam brought the whole world into a state of separation from God, all mankind included, Jesus the Last Adam has re united all creation to God AS IF THE FALL NEVER HAPPENED!
Now I neither can completely prove this, nor am I going to insist that this is divinely revealed truth.; I haven't worked out all the implications of this -- but it seems that this is just of God to do this -- i.e., reverse the effect of the Fall in the same manner as the Fall occurred.
So in essence, Jesus died for Adam judicially, and also is our Passover Lamb that we might pass over from death to life if we so choose. This is why the New Covenant is better, because all the righteousness of all the OT saints still could not get them into Heaven UNTIL ADAM'S TRANSGRESSION WAS PAID FOR and mankind reunited to God.
Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
This is simply a matter of justice and ethics. Since it was to God that the ransom was paid and He being perfectly just (Gen 18:25), then He would be obligated to no longer hold captive those who were in bondage.
EXACTLY!! When Adam's transgression was paid for, the ransom for all mankind was paid and we could no longer be held in bondage as were the OT saints. Salvation is then also our response to God's calling and our entering into covenant with God through Jesus Christ.
The inescapable conclusion is that for whoever the ransom was paid, they are free.
Let's see. Did Jesus pay the ransom for all? Or for just a select few. We say all. This is the historical position of the Christian Faith since the time of the Early Fathers. The Cross is not lessened nor dishonored if men spurn the gift and turn to their own way.(One of many responses I heard as a Calvinist)
And if the ransom was paid for all mankind without discrimination, then ALL are thus free and are not liable to judgment for non-payment of the ransom they owed.
The sin of Adam was done for all mankind without discrimination. The redemption of God should fit the nature of the Fall -- done for all mankind that all may obtain eternal life if they so desire.
I guess what I am trying to separate here is the corporate aspect of the sacrifice from the personal aspect. but these are just my thoughts.
I'm afraid that your conception of the Calvinist doctrine of eternal punishment is inaccurate, at least that which is held by the Infralapsarians within the camp. For, what we hold is that all men are condemned upon the basis that they are sinners;
babies are not sinners. They have no ability to make an act of volition. This is why I find the idea of babies being sent to hell because they are "not elect" reprehensible.
having received the "curse" of Adam's transgression,their covenant head, i.e., the guilt judgment incurred by Adam;
No man can be guilty for another man's sin. If that were so, I could be found guilty for your sin. I can suffer if you are my covenantal head and you sin, but that does not mean that I am a sinner like you. Example: when the prophets who were righteous men were taken into captivity along with the idol worshipping kings of Israel
a corruption of nature which is inherited by them
Indeed. All men are born with this corruption. The Early Fathers described it as sickness and the Eucharist they called "the medicine of immortality."
and guilt which is imputed to them.
No, what mankind received from Adam was the state of separation from God which the Bible calls "death". I am not guilty of Adam's sin. I am guilty of my own.
Thus God is perfectly just in condemning all men to eternal torment, they being doubly guilty.
Not what the Bible teaches. Jesus said that He would be the Judge on the Last Day and the basis upon which He would send men into perdition would be what they had done in their lives, not the sin of another (John 5: 28 - 29).
As to the condemnation of "non-elect infants", they being members of the human race whose head is the same Adam of that of adults, inherit a corruption of nature from which sin is its fruit and likewise guilt is imputed to their account, they are not exempt from God's wrath nor His perfect justice. (cf. Rom 3:10-18; 9:11ff; Eph 2:1-3; et al) That some infants are elect it cannot be doubted. But I think you would be hard-pressed to show from Scripture that ALL infants are "elect". To hold to such a view would prove too much, for most infants mature into adulthood and thus this would terminate in Universalism, which you have also said you reject, i.e., you do hold that there will be a Judgment by which some will be found guilty and cast into eternal damnation.
As I said before, a man is only held guilty for that which he has done. Infants have done nothing...therefore they are guiltless
