A Unique Commentary on Romans

I invite everyone to read a unique commentary on the book of Romans. 


Romans 3:21 BUT NOW, no longer does the human race have to strive to attain and maintain God’s acceptance on the basis of who they are and what they can do. Our decree of judicial perfection in the eyes of God comes not through Christ’s death for our sins, but through our union with Christ’s resurrection life. If a person believes Christ died for their sins, but does not believe that God’s justice was satisfied, when Christ died for those sins, that person has not believed Christ died for their sins. God purchased the human race out of sins dominion, never to be returned to the market place of sin again. 


By removing the sin issue from the table of God’s justice, God effectively canceled Satan’s ownership of all the human race. Satan can lay claim to no person based on that persons sinfulness. If we misunderstand justification, we are going to have a difficult time understanding the cornerstone that comes prior to sanctification. Since people link a justified standing before God with performance of their own, they also link a sanctified standing before God with their own performance. And as a result, they believe the degree to which they stand sanctified in God’s eyes depends entirely upon the degree to which they remain holy in behavior. 


If they do not see themselves as being holy in conduct, they do not believe that God sees them as being holy, either. We need to understand that forgiveness was all upfront and all-inclusive, but when we accept this idea of conditional forgiveness/forgiveness on the installment plan; a little forgiveness here, a little forgiveness there, the need for new forgiveness for new sin, that is the atonement program of Israel. The truth is, our deeds do not determine our destiny, our faith in Christ’s faithfulness determines our destiny. 


Today people think they have to ask God to forgive them for the sins that God is no longer charging to their account in the first place. Ministers of righteousness would have people believe God is not totally reconciled in his mind. Satan and his forces want to keep sin on the table of God’s justice today, as much in the Age of Grace as he has in the other ages. If Satan had known what Jesus Christ would actually accomplish where the sins of the world are concerned, Satan would not have had Christ crucified. 


godsreconciliation.blogspot.com...

I gave you your first flag, but you will come to realise that bringing original material to the site meets with more approval than quoting a blog.
Welcome to the site. We need more good theology, though you must expect some barbed attacks as well.

What an ingenious salvation plan, to take someone else that is righteous and join us to that person. Sin causes a debt to God so large that it can never be paid by ourselves, but the person who knows what Jesus Christ really accomplished, exist in a completely new relationship with God. Justification is a legal act, wherein God deems the sinner righteous on the basis of Christ’s righteousness.

a reply to: newnature1

It seems to me that was saying regardless of what you do in this life... all is forgiven

As long as your belief that your "debt" was already paid is present

Is that correct?

Today people think they have to ask God to forgive them for the sins that God is no longer charging to their account in the first place. Ministers of righteousness would have people believe God is not totally reconciled in his mind. God’s reconciliation to the human race took place when the human race was actively his enemy, not after the human race repented. The entire human race is guilty when it comes to human merit, performance, and production and all fall short continually coming short of the righteousness of God himself. All of the human race are in need of a justification that will come totally apart from anything that they do. Paul wants the human race to know at one point in time something was true, but now something else is true.

a reply to: newnature1

Why do we have to be as righteous as "God himself"?

How could we not "fall short"?

And why does this god need blood anyways?

Paul went on to tell us that the person who would have righteousness freely attributed to their account, is the person who has believed something, and it is an issue Paul said of faith from two different perspectives, “from faith to faith.” The first “faith” in that expression is a reference to the faith OF, or belonging to Christ himself. 


So it was ultimately Christ’s faith that allowed God’s justice to remain intact, as God declares an unrighteous believer to be righteous. You see, apart from Christ’s faith and his faithfulness to carry out the Father’s will based on that faith, there would not be anyone perfectly righteous to whom God could join a believing sinner.

Paul went on to tell us that the person who would have righteousness freely attributed to their account, is the person who has believed something, and it is an issue Paul said of faith from two different perspectives, “from faith to faith.” The first “faith” in that expression is a reference to the faith OF, or belonging to Christ himself. 


So it was ultimately Christ’s faith that allowed God’s justice to remain intact, as God declares an unrighteous believer to be righteous. You see, apart from Christ’s faith and his faithfulness to carry out the Father’s will based on that faith, there would not be anyone perfectly righteous to whom God could join a believing sinner.

The Noahide covenant, you may not spill human blood. And you may not eat animal flesh that has the lifeblood in it, because the blood is the life and that belongs to God, that’s holy. So the life force is holy, and the life force is in the blood; Leviticus 17:11, repeats the blood prohibition, and then it offers a rationale. “For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have assigned it to you for making expiation for your lives upon the altar.” God assigned it to them to use in sacrificial practices. It is the blood as life that effects expiation, purging and atonement. The blood of sacrificial animals is assigned by God as a detergent, if you will, to cleanse the sanctuary of the impurities that are caused by the sinful deeds of the Israelites. Purification of the sanctuary was believed to be critical to the health and the well-being of the community. If the sanctuary is not purged of impurity, it can become polluted to the point when God is driven out entirely. The purification offering acts on the sanctuary, not on the offerer.

a reply to: newnature1

Doesn't really explain why he wants blood though does it...

Once the sanctuary is purged, the offerer has settled his debt, he’s repaired the damage he caused. He’s fully atoned, and God is no longer repelled by the impurity that marred his sanctuary. On the day of atonement, a purification sacrifice is brought on behalf of the community to purify the sanctuary of the impurities that have been caused by Israel’s sin. And the high priest loads all of the sins and impurities of the Israelites on the head of a goat, which then carries them off into the wilderness away from the sanctuary. Every sin pollutes the sanctuary; it may not mark the sinner, but, it does mark the sanctuary. It scars the face of the sanctuary. 


Matt. 27:51, the earthquake that fractured the rock opened a fissure that ran down through 20 foot of solid rock into a cave and cracked the stone lid on top of a black stone volt where the Ark of the Covenant lie hidden inside, pushing the lid aside. John 19:34, the blood of Jesus ran down through that crevice and dripped onto the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant that was hidden by God and the prophet Jeremiah, right under where they crucified Jesus, 620 years earlier when the Babylonians destroyed Salomon’s temple. 


The Greek word used for “the cross” on which Jesus was put to death is “stauros,” which denotes an upright pale or stake. It never means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle, but always of one piece alone. There is nothing in the Greek of the New Testament even to imply two pieces of timber. The blood of Jesus would do no good for the Israelites dripping on “stauros!” The issue with God today is the son, not sin; because the blood of Jesus dripped on “stauros” or dripped on “the Mercy Seat of the Ark of the Covenant?”

a reply to: newnature1

Funny how people seem to think they can take their sins and place them on an innocent life... then destroy that life and believe they have found retribution

Seems like a very blood thirsty god... to say the least

The notion of the eternal torment of the wicked can only be defended by accepting the Greek view of the immortality and indestructibility of the soul, a concept which is foreign to Scripture. Everlasting torture is intolerable from a moral point of view, because it pictures God acting like a bloodthirsty monster who maintains an everlasting Auschwitz for his enemies, whom he does not even allow to die. 


Consider the moral implications of the traditional view of hell, which depicts God as a cruel torturer who torments the wicked throughout all eternity. The thought of such a torment being deliberately inflicted by divine decree, is totally incompatible with the idea of God as infinite love. 


Many Christians will be sorely disappointed to discover that their beliefs in the afterlife are a delusion. When this happens, it will cause personal crisis to Christians accustom to believing that at death their souls break loose from their bodies and continue to exist either in Heaven or in the torment of Hell. 


Redemption is the restoration of the whole person, and not the salvation of the soul apart from the body.

a reply to: newnature1

Good commentary as that is the good news of our salvation . What we couldn't achieve morally we cant maintain through morality . If it was morality God wanted then grace (the free gift) becomes conditional ....peace

It is up to those of the world to either accept or reject their redeemer, but that does no less make him their redeemer. When we accept our redeemer and the price he paid, the ransom he paid, then we are joined to Christ and we have his righteousness attributed to our account. 


Those who reject the gift are thumbing their noses at the one who died to paid that price for their redemption. The price was paid for all, and through that payment Christ redeemed the entire human race from the sin barrier that separated the world from God. It is now a son issue, not a sin issue.

What is given in exchange for another as the price of their redemption. If the ransom was for all, then the payment was made for all. The price was paid for all and through that payment Christ redeemed the entire human race from the sin barrier that separated the world from God.