If God elects people, how can He rightly punish the non-elect?

[sparkman]

Death is also used in a spiritual sense in Scripture.

For instance, in Ephesians 2:1-2, it clearly says that unconverted mankind is dead in trespasses and sins.

They weren't literally dead..they were separated from God, who is the source of all life.

Your teachers are ignorant of Scripture.

None of you would be having this discussion if you hadn't given death multiple definitions. If death is death, all these answers are simple.

And the only reasons to believe death has any other meaning than the obvious come from ancient pagan belief systems, not the bible.

 

[Reborn]

The flesh is a BASE NATURE and has nothing to do with being "born guilty" or being "born condemned" or being "born disabled from being able to yield to God," all of which the doctrine of Original Sin teaches.

The error of Original Sin teaches that when Adam sinned that it somehow changed the nature of all his descendents. When the Bible speaks of the flesh it is speaking of the natural or carnal passions and when it speaks of how the "flesh cannot please God" the context is of one "walking in a base state" as opposed to yielding to the Spirit of God. It is not speaking of some sin infection wrought by Adam and then passed down whereby an individual lacks the ability to obey God.

Original Sin = Inability.

Inability = Man is not responsible because man can not DO what God commands man to do.

Augustine redefined grace to be an "offset to inability."

The Bible does not teach dual natures existing in man at the same time. The Bible teaches that we are present in flesh bodies by which we are tempted.

1Co 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

Jas 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
Jas 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.

The "lusts of the flesh" are not a "sinful nature." The translators of the NIV often translate Sarx as "sinful nature" because their theology was rooted in the dualism of Augustine. Sarx simply means flesh and the context is the natural passions, not a sinful nature.

Jesus was in the same flesh that we are in and was tempted in all points as we are. The difference with Jesus is that He never CHOSE to sin. Nor was Jesus ever ignorant of righteousness for He was born of the very Spirit of God and abided in it at all times. We are clearly born neutral and ignorant BUT NOT DISABLED.

The flesh body is not a nature, a nature is a predisposition to do something and is related to our constitution. This is why the word nature in the Greek means...

G5449
φύσις
phusis
foo'-sis
From G5453; growth (by germination or expansion), that is, (by implication) natural production (lineal descent); by extension a genus or sort; figuratively native disposition, constitution or usage: - ([man-]) kind, nature ([-al]).

Thayer's offers even more clarity...

The theologians who uphold Original Sin NEVER show people that definition, especially as it relates to both Eph 2:3 and Rom 2:14. What the theologians do is snip Eph 2:3 and use it as a proof text for an inherited sin nature (note: Eph 2:3 says NOTHING of birth) whilst they IGNORE the use of Phusis in Rom 2:14.

Phusis can go either way, a natural disposition to do evil or a natural disposition to do good. CHOICE IS INVOLVED NOT INABILITY.

Summary - The issue here (as raised in the OP) is ABILITY versus INABILITY to obey God. If man is unable to obey God due to lacking independent free agency by where he can CHOOSE to yield to the known light of God or not then man is not responsible. If man is not responsible then it would be unjust for a God to hold him accountable for deeds that he could not do otherwise.

It is simple logic and Biblical.

LOL.
Nothing is simple about your long winded posts.

 

[valiant]

People are not saved because they are the 'elect', they are the elect because they are saved.

LOL we disagree again. Men are saved because God has chosen them from the foundation of the world. At that time He already has their names written in the Lamb's Book of Life. Thus it is an election of individuals. But because those individuals then make up the true church, it is also the election of the church, God's true Israel..

 

[sparkman]

skinski7, i will give you one thing..I don't think Pelagius was dumb enough to be a full-blown Pelagian as we define them today...like those who deny original sin, imputed righteousness, justification by faith, and substitutionary atonement.

Also, the ones that claim they are sinless and believe in open theism.

 

[ChrisHill]

Death is also used in a spiritual sense in Scripture.

For instance, in Ephesians 2:1-2, it clearly says that unconverted mankind is dead in trespasses and sins.

They weren't literally dead..they were separated from God, who is the source of all life.

Your teachers are ignorant of Scripture.

You keep thinking I have teachers. I haven't been to a group of any kind for over 10 years, after I left a very mainstream church. I just read the bible, that's all I do. Sometimes I take a look at what other people have to say about it online, and usually it's a wall of mishmash.

Dead in trespasses and sins isn't redefining death, it's just saying that without Jesus changing the law by his heroic actions, every single person would have eventually died and that's it, story over. The definition of what death is remains constant.

 

[Skinski7]

Jesus Christ was not born of a man - the seed that conceived him did not come from a man and therefore the sin nature was not imparted unto him.

Where is that taught in the Bible?

The Bible teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin as a SIGN. The Bible says not a word about the purpose being to bypass any inherited sin nature.

You are blaming sin on BIRTH. You blame the reason for you sinning on your BIRTH. Thus you are approaching sinning from the standpoint of a VICTIM, not a criminal. "Oh woe is me, I was born this way, I cannot help it, I was born programmed to sin by necessity."

That attitude completely destroys REPENTANCE as being a mind change which necessitates a forsaking of evil. Repentance instead becomes a mere confession of sinfulness.

The doctrine of Original Sin is very dangerous because it completely redefines Christianity at the foundational level. It is surely satanically inspired to such an end. It redefines repentance and faith which is the means by which we approach God in order to be reconciled.

God created the seed in the woman by which Jesus Christ was conceived. "I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and "her seed". (Gen. 3:15)

Yet that enmity has nothing to do with Original Sin. That is you forcing such a connection by reading it into the text. The Bible doesn't teach anything close to that.

The enmity is between Satan and Jesus Christ, not Jesus Christ and Original Sin. Original Sin is a myth.

[Man usually carries the "seed"]

"a nature is a predisposition to do something and is related to our constitution" - a nature is a predisposition - natural man predisposed to sin; we all have the knowledge of good and evil and we all can make a choice to do one or the other - it is just that man's predisposition is to choose evil. . . .

If that was the case then Paul would not have used the word PHUSIS in saying...

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Look at the Thayer's definition I referenced. Nature has to do with GROWTH. A sin nature or a godly nature is something that GROWS from a state of neutrality. Babies are not born evil, nor are they born righteous.

By claiming that babies are born evil you completely throw personal responsibility as it relates to evil right out the window. Can you not see that?

we are by nature the children of wrath.

Ephesians 2:3 does not say BIRTH NATURE. Look at the context...

Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Eph 2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

The context is simply a PAST WALK. The passage says not a word about being BORN DEAD or being BORN UNDER WRATH. You force that notion into the text when you reference it as a proof text of such.

[quoteAgain, how does a 3 year old know how to lie? When you ask a three year old if they took a cookie and ate the cookie . . . they will answer no.
[/QUOTE]

Jesus knew how to lie, He chose not to do it.

Knowing how to sin does not mean one has to sin.

Adam knew how to disobey God before He disobeyed. Did Adam and Eve have to be born sinners in order to sin? Obviously not, they CHOSE to sin just like everyone else CHOSE to do so.

The root issue here is that Original Sin teaches Inability. Original Sin is also associated with being BORN CONDEMNED and BORN DEAD.

Original Sin teaches that people sin because they are "born defective." It is a lie and it is dangerous.

 

[tribesman]

Based on this verse, I don't understand how God can punish those who are not elect.

Ephesians 1:4-5 (KJV) "According as he hath chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will"

So if He has chosen some, then that means that nobody else has the ability to get saved now, right? But how can they be blamed if they don't have the ability to do good (since they are born sinners), or accept Jesus' sacrifice to cover them?

Some of you might say that they still deserve to go to hell because they have chosen to sin against God, but because of the conditions we've been put in, it's impossible not to. No one chose to be born. None of us chose to be put into a life where it's impossible to stop doing the very thing that condemns them. But even if they're given the gospel, it doesn't matter because they weren't made to be saved and go to Heaven anyway.

Thanks to everyone who responds.

God owes man nothing but the just punishment for his detestable sins. Man's sins rightly condemns him and are the cause of such punishment. God's election of the Saints is caused by nothing in them, it is purely God's mercy and grace at work. Had God only decided to rightly punish mankind then none would be saved, however God set apart a people of his own before the foundation of the world...

 

[Jason0047]

You contradict yourself Jason.

Out of one side of your mouth you speak of "free will choices" and then out of the other you speak of...



How can you possibly uphold free will if you claim babies sin from their very birth?

You have thrown CHOICE out the window as it pertains to sin. You cannot logically have it both ways.

You cannot teach that, on the one hand, you are responsible for your sin due to choice and then, on the other hand, teach that all people sin due to lack of choice. Cannot you see the logical inconsistency in your thinking?


You conclude...



Where does the Bible teach that the "righteousness of Christ" is imputed to you when you accept Jesus as your saviour?

The Bible does not teach that. The Bible teaches that God reckons FAITH ITSELF as righteousness (Rom 4:5). Why don't you teach what the Bible teaches? Why do you instead teach what the Reformers taught with their "moral transfer" doctrine?

Original Sin is not true nor is the Reformed doctrine of "imputed righteousness of Christ." Impure means RECKON and God simply counts the FAITH of the faithful as righteousness because it is representative of a pure heart. In other words God does not count our past sins against us if we have truly repented and are walking faithfully. There is no "imputed righteousness of Christ." Quote me anywhere in the Bible which teaches that the "righteousness of Christ" is imputed to anyone. It is not in the Bible, the Bible specifically says...

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Faith is counted for righteousness. What kind of faith? A faith that WALKS (Rom 4:12), a faith that establishes the law of God in the heart (Rom 3:31), a faith that works by love (Gal 5:6). Why not teach that instead of the traditions of men?

You go on...



I have shown you before but you don't seem to care Jason.

Heb 9:14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
Heb 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
Heb 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Heb 9:17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
Heb 9:18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.
Heb 9:19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
Heb 9:20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

The Bible teaches that Jesus died in order to cleanse our conscience from the guilt associated with our past sins. This guilt is purged via entering into the New Covenant with God via the blood of Jesus Christ, the covenant which Jesus put into force through His death.

The death of Jesus Christ has NOTHING to do with this false doctrine of Penal Substitution. Nor does it have anything to do with the false doctrines of Moral Government or Satisfaction (which are all substitutional).

The substitution for the wrath you deserve is your REPENTANCE AND FAITH which is something God has granted you through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. In other words, without the New Covenant there would be no means to find reconciliation with God because God would not have provided such a means.

Jesus did not die as your substitute. Jesus died on your behalf and Jesus died as your example. A substitute is not an example, a substitute is a replacement. Jesus is not your replacement. Jesus is your LEADER and you are to FOLLOW.


Where? Where is it clearly taught?

Where in those chapters does it teach that the "righteousness of Christ" is credited to your account?

Where in those chapters does it teach that Jesus died as your substitute?

Rom 5:18 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.

Do you really think your guilt is associated with simply BEING BORN because Adam chose to sin? Adam sinned for you and you are guilty because of that? Adam was your disobedience substitute? Adam disobeyed for you?

Do you really think your righteousness is associated with simply ACCEPTING JESUS because Jesus obeyed God? Jesus obeyed for you and you are righteous because of that? Jesus was your obedience substitute? Jesus obeyed for you?

That is EXACTLY how "Original Sin" and the "Imputed Righteousness of Christ" doctrines utilise that verse. How can you be so easily deceived by such nonsense Jason?

Judgement came upon all through Adam in the context of EXAMPLE. Adam led the way in sinning against God and ALL HAVE SINNED and thus all have wrought their own condemnation.

om 5:12 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:

Not that "all have sinned IN Adam" as Augustine believed due to the error in the Vulgate, no, rather that all have sinned either like Adam (disobedience to a direct command) or sinned unlike Adam (disobedience to the light of conscience).

Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Rom 5:14 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.

Original Sin is not taught in Romans chapter 5. People just say it is and then others repeat it like mindless parrots.


Is that so?

To deny that which is not in the Bible is to deny the Gospel? Where did Jesus teach Original Sin and where did Jesus teach that His righteousness would be credited to your account? Jesus taught...

Mat 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus said "YOUR RIGHTEOUSNESS" and the context was clearly related to HEART PURITY. You don't preach the Gospel Jason, you preach a perverted message premised on the teachings of men and then somehow try and mix "obedience to God" into it. You need to count it all dung (like Paul) and start fresh.



Jesus Christ dying FOR YOU does not equate to DYING IN YOUR PLACE. When Jesus...

Heb 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

... He did not do that as your substitute because you could not do it. Only Jesus was spotless and without blame, only Jesus was worthy.

Jesus Christ dying FOR YOU does not equate to DYING IN YOUR PLACE. When Jesus...

1Pe 2:21 For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
1Pe 2:22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
1Pe 2:23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:
1Pe 2:24 Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.

... He did not do that as your substitute but did it as an EXAMPLE that you might FOLLOW IN HIS STEPS.

Joh 12:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.
Joh 12:25 He that loveth his life shall lose it; and he that hateth his life in this world shall keep it unto life eternal.
Joh 12:26 If any man serve me, let him follow me; and where I am, there shall also my servant be: if any man serve me, him will my Father honour.

Jesus did not teach substitution anywhere and Jesus PREACHED THE GOSPEL.

Babies are born subject to the natural passions of the flesh. They are not sinners.

Sinning unto death involves REBELLION TO GOD and REBELLION REQUIRES KNOWLEDGE AND CHOICE.

I bet Jesus did the wrong thing in ignorance as a baby. I bet Jesus pooped his pants. I bet Jesus made a mess as an infant. I bet Jesus cried because he wanted something. Yet when the intellect of Jesus developed enough where He was aware of the light of conscience He did not CHOOSE to rebel against God and that is why He is worthy. If there is no CHOICE then vice and virtue have zero meaning. Is that not self evident?

Jesus never pooped His pants as an infant? Do you think somehow Jesus, as an infant, was not subject to the natural passions of the flesh like any other baby?

There are none that teach that man is BORN WICKED AND CONDEMNED.

We must be born again because God is Spirit and to abide with God we must walk in the Spirit. The necessity of the new birth has nothing to do with being "born a sinner." We are born carnal subject to base passions, we have to rise above that through CHOICE and bring our bodies into subjection to God.


Here is the recommended reading list from your link...

Recommended Reading

• Pink, A.W. Our Accountability to God (formerly Gleanings From the Scriptures: Man's Total Depravity).
• Boettner, Lorraine. Total Inability. In The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination.
• Boston, Thomas. The State of Nature. In Human Nature in its Fourfold State.
• Calvin, John. Book 2, Chapters 1-5. In Institutes of the Christian Religion.
• Luther, Martin. The Bondage of the Will.
• Edwards, Jonathan. Freedom of the Will (The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 1).

A whose who list of people who all argued in favour of being able to sin and not surely die.

You might as well be because your theology is established on the exact same foundation and thus you are really in opposition to yourself. Not only that but you blatantly promote Calvinist material.

You really need to stop posting an reconsider your position Jason. You are under a strong delusion.

Most understand the concept of Original Sin, Imputed Righteousness, and the Substitionary Atonement and how that is not in conflict with free will. When I say "free will" I am talking about "limited free will." For we obviously do not have the free will to fly like superman and or to shoot laser beams from our eyes. A tiger if it is put into a tight cage to fit it's body will not be able to move. But if the tiger is put into acres of land in a fenced in area, it is free to move about (even if that area is limited). It is free to move, but the animal is still limited to where it can go. The same is true for believers and unbelievers. Unbelievers are slaves to sin in the fact that they will always have some type of sin in their life because they inherited a sin nature from Adam. But that does not mean they do not have the free will to do good when it comes to certain things. For example: There are many unbelievers who choose not to kill and do drugs. Also, the believer who is born again spiritually is given a new heart with new desires. He now has the capacity (Because of His Word and by Christ living within them) to conquer sin in their life (i.e. to stop sinning), thereby becoming a slave to righteousness. However, even the believer has "limited free will:", too. For the believer has the free will to follow Christ or to turn away from Him. Yet, the believer does not have unlimited free will and can do whatever he pleases with no consequences. Nor is the believer unchanged, either. For the true believer is born again spiritually and is a new creature in Christ (With the Lord living and working in them).

As for the verses you brought up: While I surely can refute the verses that you are misusing here, I am not going to do so. Because I have the feeling that you will not believe them even if I do show you the context and or other verses.

 

[psychomom]

Perhaps psychomom will respond and say

Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Or you will also be like him. (Prov 26:4)

 

[sparkman]

You keep thinking I have teachers. I haven't been to a group of any kind for over 10 years, after I left a very mainstream church. I just read the bible, that's all I do. Sometimes I take a look at what other people have to say about it online, and usually it's a wall of mishmash.

Dead in trespasses and sins isn't redefining death, it's just saying that without Jesus changing the law by his heroic actions, every single person would have eventually died and that's it, story over. The definition of what death is remains constant.

Unbelievers are cut off from the true life, which is God. They are spiritually dead. Physical death is the separation from physical life, and spiritual death is the separation from spiritual life.

 

[KennethC]

LOL we disagree again. Men are saved because God has chosen them from the foundation of the world. At that time He already has their names written in the Lamb's Book of Life. Thus it is an election of individuals. But because those individuals then make up the true church, it is also the election of the church, God's true Israel..

Chosen from the foundation of the world to come to Christ for remission and reconciled to God................

"For many are called but few are chosen"................Matthew 22:14

This is because all mankind is called to come to the Lord to receive that remission, but only few will be chosen because not all people will put their faith and trust in the Lord. People need to get out of those doctrines that teach no free will for mankind, as the bible is full of free will choices from the OT all the way through the NT.

No free will is a false doctrine teaching that is another one that came from Augustine's false theology.
The Word of God says He gives us the choice to choose eternal life or eternal death, as He does not force anybody to come to Him and love Him. Obedience comes from love and trust which are free will choices to do, not obligation or force !!!

 

[Sirk]

Most understand the concept of Original Sin, Imputed Righteousness, and the Substitionary Atonement and how that is not in conflict with free will. When I say "free will" I am talking about "limited free will." For we obviously do not have the free will to fly like superman and or to shoot laser beams from our eyes. A tiger if it is put into a tight cage to fit it's body will not be able to move. But if the tiger is put into acres of land in a fenced in area, it is free to move about (even if that area is limited). It is free to move, but the animal is still limited to where it can go. The same is true for believers and unbelievers. Unbelievers are slaves to sin in the fact that they will always have some type of sin in their life because they inherited a sin nature from Adam. But that does not mean they do not have the free will to do good when it comes to certain things. For example: There are many unbelievers who choose not to kill and do drugs. Also, the believer who is born again spiritually is given a new heart with new desires. He now has the capacity (Because of His Word and by Christ living within them) to conquer sin in their life (i.e. to stop sinning). However, even the believer has "limited free will:", too. For the believer has the free will to follow Christ or to turn away from Him. Yet, the believer does not have unlimited free will and can do whatever he pleases with no consequences. Nor is the believer unchanged, either. For the true believer is born again spiritually and is a new creature in Christ (With the Lord living and working in them).

As for the verses you brought up: While I surely can refute the verses that you are misusing here, I am not going to do so. Because I have the feeling that you will not believe even if I do show you the context and or other verses.

[video=youtube;k6p1Ck0ab80]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6p1Ck0ab80[/video]

 

[Jason0047]

[video=youtube;k6p1Ck0ab80]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6p1Ck0ab80[/video]

May the Lord's love shine upon you.

 

[PeterJens]

Are people punished for sin? Or is the consequences of sin is death, destruction.

We have a concept that we are ok if only we did not sin, rather we are not ok which is shown by the fact we sin.
A man with a disease is dangerous not because they are a person but because they are ill. No matter how they behave or try to do good, or impress people or God, they are still going to die because they are ill.

It is how you are inside, what eats you up, what gives you life that defines who you are. Jesus said we need streams of living water springing up from within.

So in a sense if we look at life as we are ok, but fail so need redeeming, then it is punishment, which could be easily just forgiven. This is the self righteous view of life, the problem is with God not forgiving not we are so lost, we are doomed.

This is why universalism fails because it does not accept people are lost and the fruit of sin is death

 

[ChrisHill]

Unbelievers are cut off from the true life, which is God. They are spiritually dead. Physical death is the separation from physical life, and spiritual death is the separation from spiritual life.

The true life is just life. God extends grace to all, which is why any of us are still breathing. He is our breath, he is our life, literally and spiritually. In the end, though, the wicked will not accept that grace, as Isaiah 26:10 states.

Are people punished for sin? Or is the consequences of sin is death, destruction.

We have a concept that we are ok if only we did not sin, rather we are not ok which is shown by the fact we sin.
A man with a disease is dangerous not because they are a person but because they are ill. No matter how they behave or try to do good, or impress people or God, they are still going to die because they are ill.

It is how you are inside, what eats you up, what gives you life that defines who you are. Jesus said we need streams of living water springing up from within.

So in a sense if we look at life as we are ok, but fail so need redeeming, then it is punishment, which could be easily just forgiven. This is the self righteous view of life, the problem is with God not forgiving not we are so lost, we are doomed.

This is why universalism fails because it does not accept people are lost and the fruit of sin is death

The things you are saying are very confusing, bible has a much simpler answer. Paul makes it clear, in fact: if you take resurrection (which Jesus accomplished) out of the picture and here is the answer to everything:

Eat, drink, and be merry - for tomorrow we die.

 

[Yonah]

freewill or predestination? answer yes

 

[valiant]

Chosen from the foundation of the world to come to Christ for remission and reconciled to God................

"For many are called but few are chosen"................Matthew 22:14

This is because all mankind is called to come to the Lord to receive that remission, but only few will be chosen because not all people will put their faith and trust in the Lord. People need to get out of those doctrines that teach no free will for mankind, as the bible is full of free will choices from the OT all the way through the NT.

No free will is a false doctrine teaching that is another one that came from Augustine's false theology.
The Word of God says He gives us the choice to choose eternal life or eternal death, as He does not force anybody to come to Him and love Him. Obedience comes from love and trust which are free will choices to do, not obligation or force !!!

you can believe your philosophy I prefer to believe the Bible

 

[valiant]

You keep thinking I have teachers. I haven't been to a group of any kind for over 10 years, after I left a very mainstream church. I just read the bible, that's all I do. Sometimes I take a look at what other people have to say about it online, and usually it's a wall of mishmash.

Dead in trespasses and sins isn't redefining death, it's just saying that without Jesus changing the law by his heroic actions, every single person would have eventually died and that's it, story over. The definition of what death is remains constant.

you really have a strange mind. no wonder you at in a church of one man who all agree with each other.

To be dead in trespasses and sins and thus in need of being 'made alive' can only signify spiritual death. Christ was dead and became alive, we also were dead and have come alive. In context it has nothing to do with future death, but with past death, the death of the spirit..

 

[peacefulbeliever]

[/COLOR]Where is that taught in the Bible?

The Bible teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin as a SIGN. The Bible says not a word about the purpose being to bypass any inherited sin nature.

Jesus was born of a virgin . . . one that God chose to create "seed" in and the Holy Spirit overshadowed her and she conceived. No contamination of a sinful nature - Just as Adam was created genetically flawless (created), Jesus also had to be genetically flawless (woman's "seed") - Neither man was a robot - Adam fell - Jesus remained sinless.

Mankind after Adam are born in Adam's image. Mankind is descended from fallen Adam; are begotten in Adam's image and partake of his fallen nature. Born of the flesh, we possess the nature of the begetter, and are flesh. If any good is to be found in man - he must be "born of the Spirit": then man partakes of the divine nature.

You are blaming sin on BIRTH. You blame the reason for you sinning on your BIRTH. Thus you are approaching sinning from the standpoint of a VICTIM, not a criminal. "Oh woe is me, I was born this way, I cannot help it, I was born programmed to sin by necessity."

No I am not blaming sin on birth. Was I born with a sin nature - yes. I am totally up front and honest, with myself, with God and with others - If I sin it is because of the choices I made. I take full responsibility for my sin and the choices I make.

That attitude completely destroys REPENTANCE as being a mind change which necessitates a forsaking of evil. Repentance instead becomes a mere confession of sinfulness.

The doctrine of Original Sin is very dangerous because it completely redefines Christianity at the foundational level. It is surely satanically inspired to such an end. It redefines repentance and faith which is the means by which we approach God in order to be reconciled.

How does it redefine and destroy repentance? I was a wretch, I was without God and without hope in this world - I was a sinner. I wanted God as my heavenly Father, I wanted to be cleansed, I got sick and tired of being sick and tired and needed a savior to reconcile me back to God - I repented of my wrong doing, my sins, confessed Jesus as Lord and believed God raised him from the dead so that I could live a better life and not live in the "gutter" any longer.

Yet that enmity has nothing to do with Original Sin. That is you forcing such a connection by reading it into the text. The Bible doesn't teach anything close to that.

The enmity is between Satan and Jesus Christ, not Jesus Christ and Original Sin. Original Sin is a myth.

You are correct the enmity is between Satan and Jesus Christ . . . that was part of the curse that was placed upon Satan and then also upon mankind . . . Satan's original sin is the ROOT of all of mankind's problems . . . and if one is not born again then they also have enmity between themselves and God until they repent and are reconciled back to God.
If that was the case then Paul would not have used the word PHUSIS in saying...

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Look at the Thayer's definition I referenced. Nature has to do with GROWTH. A sin nature or a godly nature is something that GROWS from a state of neutrality. Babies are not born evil, nor are they born righteous.

By claiming that babies are born evil you completely throw personal responsibility as it relates to evil right out the window. Can you not see that?

Ephesians 2:3 does not say BIRTH NATURE. Look at the context...

Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
Eph 2:2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:
Eph 2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

The context is simply a PAST WALK. The passage says not a word about being BORN DEAD or being BORN UNDER WRATH. You force that notion into the text when you reference it as a proof text of such.
Yes the context is about a person's walk before they were born again - dead in trespasses and sins . . . walking in accordance to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience . . Who is working in these children of disobedience? - the prince of the power of the air - Satan - Enmity began with Satan and that enmity is there between God and man until that man is born again.

Jesus knew how to lie, He chose not to do it. Knowing how to sin does not mean one has to sin.

That is correct . . . and you are correct - No one has to sin. But that is not what I asked you - How does a 3 year old KNOW how to lie (if it is not inherent)?

Adam knew how to disobey God before He disobeyed. Did Adam and Eve have to be born sinners in order to sin? Obviously not, they CHOSE to sin just like everyone else CHOSE to do so.

The root issue here is that Original Sin teaches Inability. Original Sin is also associated with being BORN CONDEMNED and BORN DEAD.

Original Sin teaches that people sin because they are "born defective." It is a lie and it is dangerous.

Adam KNEW how to disobey - God saw everything that he had made and behold it was very good .. . . . Adam chose to follow Eve's deception - they both disobeyed therefore death by sin entered the world . . for by ONE man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous -

That is your opinion . . .

 

[Elin]

Original Sin is a false doctrine which has its origin in Gnostic dualism. It was Augustine of Hippo through which this false doctrine came to be accepted as orthodox by the institutional church.

Baloney. . ."original" sin comes from Ro 5:19, 8:7, 2:9-10; Eph 2:3.