Michael Desmond

@MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth But I should also note, gently of course, that the POINT of asking questions OF YOU is to actually get YOU to ANSWER THE QUESTIONS I ASK, not to GIVE YOU THE ANSWER MYSELF. Calvinists. SMH.

@mpdesmond @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth You keep asking these questions, abd keep refusing to answer them yourself, which I’m afraid colours how we view your credibility. If only you’d share this great secret of what Paul’s doing in 2 Cor, I’m sure we’d see the light!

There are three imputations involved in salvation. 1. The imputation of Adam’s first sin. 2. The imputation of sins to Christ such that He bears their guilt and punishment. 3. The imputation of Christ’s full satisfaction and perfect obedience.

@MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth Fine. If you need me to do all your work for you I'll rephrase 2 Cor 5:21 for you: God made the sinless Christ to stand in the place of sin and deal with it on our behalf, so that in union with him we might become the living expression of God’s covenant faithfulness in the world.

@MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth I don't pay for X, so I can't write article-length responses, but Romans 1, 4, James 2, the Genesis account referenced by both authors, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Habakkuk, etc. etc. should make anyone who is Biblically literate at all agree with "obviously."

@mpdesmond @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth “Obviously” being used in lieu of a biblical case.

@ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth @MarkMacdonald75 You have none, because the verse you cited, 2 Corinthians 5:21 isn't talking about forensic imputation. At all. Do you even know what Paul is doing in 2 Corinthians? Why he's writing? what issues he's addressing? They have nothing to do with forensic imputation.

@mpdesmond @rootcausesleuth @MarkMacdonald75 I gave you a passage that explicitly teaches it (and I didn’t even dive into Romans 5 and other Pauline passages that teaches it) and your reaction was “single verse theology is sus.” So which is it? Do I not have anything or do I have just one? Your standards keep shifting.

@ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth @MarkMacdonald75 Obviously, in the bible faithfulness is the grounds for justification. It's not "earning" it though. That's not how relationships work (or should, if they are healthy). I don't "earn" my wife's love and support by not cheating on her. I am justified in having it by my loyalty.

Relying on Ezekiel 18:20 isn’t “single verse theology”? So based on what you’ve said here, upon what basis is someone justified before God? Is faith the grounds of justification? Is faith seen by God as righteousness that the person earns for themselves since they don’t receive Christ’s righteousness?

@RevReads289 @ReformedCaio A "gospel" (euangelion) in the 1C,AD is an announcement of the arrival or ascension of a King. The call to "believe" the "gospel" is a call to pledge fealty and loyalty to the king. Hebrews 11, to which you allude, immediately goes on to give examples of active faithfulness.

@mpdesmond @ReformedCaio Each instance of faith needs to be examined individually to determine its usage and meaning. In the case of the Gospel and our faith in Christ, I believe the best meaning is that faith in an assurance or confidence that God will fulfill His promise.

Why do I deny the imputation of Adam's guilt? It's wrong to condemn someone for a sin they did not commit. Why do I accept the imputation of Christ's righteousness? It's glorious to give someone grace and mercy that is underserved.

@RevReads289 @ReformedCaio You don't think faith (pistis) in the 1st century Jewish context is loyalty, esp. loyalty to Jesus and Yahweh?

@ReformedCaio Well Michael and I have very different views on faith based on what I just read in that thread. I don't think he would ever come to my church.

@ReformedCaio @RevReads289 You are just asserting that I'm doing that, but haven't proven it. You haven't shown how your view doesn't split the Trinity & result in Jesus being sinful. You haven't demonstrated a single error in the post either. Just blame and accuse and shame and slander is all you can do.

@RevReads289 You might want to start educating some of your fellow non-Calvinists on this because some are cutting off their theological nose to spite their face.

@MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth I explained that your misunderstanding damages both the incarnation and unity of the Trinity. Not answering that objection means you accept the ramifications of that and you therefore have a sinful savior and a broken Trinity. My view involves not taking 1 verse out of context.

@mpdesmond @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth You claimed our understanding of 2 Cor 5:21 is wrong. You now repeatedly refuse to tell us the correct meaning. What should we conclude from this?

@MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth I asked YOU a question, so YOU are the one who can't answer

@mpdesmond @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth Ok. So you are unable to back up your claim about what Paul is talking about in that text. That tells us what weight to attach to your claims.

@ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth @MarkMacdonald75 Into relationships. It's a benefaction (helpful gift) given by a Lord to a vassal with an expectation of proper use and loyalty as a result. That's what grace meant to a 1st century reader and that's not how you understand the terms.

@ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth @MarkMacdonald75 Also, I don't think you even know what faith and grace are in biblical literature. Faith is not a magic power that connects you to salvation. It is loyalty to a person. It's relational. Like I'm faithful to my wife. Grace is not a magic force that drags people...

@MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth Single verse theology is sus.

@mpdesmond @ReformedCaio @rootcausesleuth Tell us what Paul is talking about when he says that Christ was made sin for us. Tip: remember to respect the symmetry and parallels which Paul draws in the verse.

@rootcausesleuth @ReformedCaio @MarkMacdonald75 Indeed. That would be helpful but none exist. That said: of course I reject imputed righteousness. Imputation is unbiblical. Ezekiel explicitly says so. Abraham was justified by HIS faith, not justified by the imputed righteousness of God. The righteous shall live by faith.

@ReformedCaio @mpdesmond @MarkMacdonald75 Caio, I would be happy to be shown an actual Bible verse saying that we are imputed Christ’s righteousness.

If God decreed people would sin and not repent the. They are obeying Him and not rebelling against Him. Which means they aren’t sinning because sin is disobedience. You can’t have it both ways. Even if you try to appeal to “mystery” or “two wills” you CANNOT by definition be in sin if God decrees you to sin and not repent.

@rootcausesleuth @MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio That none of those verses say or imply any of those ideas? Also, that no one should be building theology off of contextually fragmented and isolated statements? Yes to both.

@MarkMacdonald75 @ReformedCaio That’s what I thought

@BornAgainBalaky @Soteriology101 None that I've heard, and not for want of trying.

@mpdesmond @Soteriology101 Do they even have any good ones?

Translation: when you choose to sin instead of resist temptation it’s because God didn’t give you effectual grace for you to overcome that temptation. Why? Because ultimately He willed for you to sin. 🤦‍♂️ This is a devastatingly harmful doctrine if you actually live as if it’s true.