Jump to content
Online Baptist Community

Winman

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Winman

  1. That makes no difference, scriptures says he was MADE of the SEED of David according to the FLESH. If we inherit sin from our father, then Jesus would have inherited a sin nature from David's SEED. Hundreds of years ago men did not understand this, but today we know we inherit DNA from our grandfathers on both sides. In fact, it was once believed that baldness was inherited from your mother's father, but they are not absolutely certain about that now, although there is real evidence this might be true. God cannot be tempted, Jesus could be tempted. Where did he get this ability? From his mother Mary. It is the ability to be tempted that people mistake for a sin nature. We are born flesh with lusts and desires that tempt us. Jesus was made flesh and was tempted in ALL POINTS as we are, he SUFFERED being tempted just like we do. There is not one word of scripture that teaches we inherit a sin nature from our father. You cannot possibly show it. I need to go to bed, but I will come back tomorrow evening.
  2. I will say what the scriptures say, that Jesus was made of the "seed" of David according to the flesh. He was made of the "fruit" of David's loins. Scripture is absolutely clear, you just don' t want to hear it. But the Jews knew the Christ had to be a physical descendant of David, and so they called him "son of David" . This phrase is used 17 times in the gospels. Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; Acts 2:30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; Mat 1:1 The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Mat 9:27 And when Jesus departed thence, two blind men followed him, crying, and saying, Thou Son of David, have mercy on us. Some folks do not want to know the truth.
  3. No kidding. That does not prove your view, scripture tells us Jesus was made of the fruit of David's loins, so if sin is inherited from our father, then Jesus would have inherited a sin nature from David. Give it up, the scriptures clearly refute this superstitious view.
  4. You are reading into scripture. I have already proven this view of yours error, the scriptures clearly tell us Jesus was MADE of the SEED of DAVID according to the FLESH. Jesus inherited David's DNA from Mary, so if sin is passed from the father, Jesus would still have inherited sin from David. No where does the Bible teach that sin is inherited from our father. That is nothing but pure superstition. And Psalm 51:5 is describing David;s mother, not David. She was doing something wrong when he was conceived, but we are not told what. We do know David did not look anything like his brothers, so perhaps his biological father was not Jesse. Happens all the time.
  5. All I know is that David's mother had two daughters with Nahash the Ammonite. I showed the scripture that tells us this. Psalm 51:5 says David was "conceived in iniquity". It is the mother that conceives, men do not conceive. This verse is describing David's mother and says she was sinning when David was conceived, but it does not give us the exact details. There are all sorts of possibilities, perhaps she got pregnant BEFORE she married Jesse. Happens every day.
  6. As I told you before, lots of people tell me I am wrong, but they can never say WHY.
  7. How does that prove Original Sin? No one is denying that all men sin. That verse has nothing to do with Original Sin whatsoever.
  8. If you stuck with what the Bible said, you would not believe in Original Sin. We KNOW that David had two sisters who were fathered by Nahash the Ammonite. This was absolutely taboo for a Jewish woman. Psalm 51:5 says David was "conceived" in sin. Men do not conceive, only women conceive, so this verse is speaking of his mother. There was some sin involved when he was conceived, but no one knows exactly what happened. But one thing Psalm 51:5 does not say is that all men are born with a sin nature. It says no such thing, you have to read that into the scriptures. And Romans 5 refutes Original Sin, verse 14 very specifically says that men from Adam to Moses HAD NOT sinned after the similitude of Adam's sin. Besides that, if Romans 5 was teaching Original Sin, it would have said ALL MEN, not men from Adam to Moses only. No, Paul was simply showing that there was a law in the world, even between Adam and Moses, and this is why men from that period spiritually died. They died because they violated the law written on their hearts Paul had told us in Romans 2.
  9. Sure, you can pull scripture out of context and claim it says what it does not say, but that does not prove your view. As I showed earlier, it is a known fact that Augustine used a flawed Latin text that said "in whom all have sinned" in Romans 5:12 which Augustine interpreted to be speaking of Adam. Nearly all Greek scholars admit the Greek does not say this and Augustine's interpretation was error. This is where the doctrine of Original Sin originated. As Dr. MacGorman, a professor of Greek for over 56 years said; http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2013/01/adam-harwood-and-jw-macgormans-dangerous-unorthodox-doctrine-inevitably-leading-to-heresy-if-not-worse.html
  10. This is how I understand it: There was sin in the world BEFORE Adam. How do I know? Because the "Serpent" was on the world and he was already a liar, a false teacher, a thief and a murderer. Death passed upon men because a LAW was given and they disOBeyed, namely "Thou shalt not EAT" of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. When Adam disOBeyed that law, death passed upon him. Read it for yourself...... Romans 5 12Wherefore, 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: 13(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14Nevertheless 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. We are "shapen in iniquity" Psalmn51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. We are all sinners..... Romans 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; But we do not "die" until we sin for the first time... Romans 7: 9For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. In conclusion, we are not responsible for ADAM's sin": we are responsible for our own. Psalm 51:5 is describing David's mother, not David. Men do no conceive, only women conceive. This scripture says David was conceived in sin. There are several theories on this. It is known that David had two sisters Zeruiah and Abagail whose father was Nahash the Ammonite. So David's mother had relations with a non-Jew before David was born which was absolutely taboo and forbidden. 1 Chr 2:15 Ozem the sixth, David the seventh: 16 Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three. 2 Sam 17:25 And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man's son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab's mother. David did not have the same mother as his seven older brothers. His mother was prOBably Jesse's second wife. Jesse and his seven sons treated David very poorly, prOBably because of his mother. When the prophet Samuel held a feast and asked to see all of Jesse's sons, TWICE Jesse failed to present David. The other seven sons were all invited, but David had to keep the sheep. Only when Samuel insisted did Jesse finally present David, whom Samuel chose. We are also told in this story that David's brothers were tall and handsome, while David was short and not handsome. 1 Sam 16:5 And he said, Peaceably: I am come to sacrifice unto the LORD: sanctify yourselves, and come with me to the sacrifice. And he sanctified Jesse and his sons, and called them to the sacrifice. 6 And it came to pass, when they were come, that he looked on Eliab, and said, Surely the LORD'S anointed is before him. 7 But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart. 8 Then Jesse called Abinadab, and made him pass before Samuel. And he said, Neither hath the LORD chosen this. 9 Then Jesse made Shammah to pass by. And he said, Neither hath the LORD chosen this. 10 Again, Jesse made seven of his sons to pass before Samuel. And Samuel said unto Jesse, The LORD hath not chosen these. 11 And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and, behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Send and fetch him: for we will not sit down till he come hither. 12 And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he. 13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah. David was the black sheep of his family, prOBably because of his mother. In Psalm 51 David is prOBably saying he was the "dog" his father and brothers had always told him he was. If David was saying he was born a sinner, that would hardly be a confession of sin.
  11. Show where I ever said such a thing. Do you think it is right for you to put words in my mouth I never said? Is that being honest? Scripture says "death" came upon all men for that all have sinned. It did not say a sin nature came upon all men. Paul could have said that, he used the word "nature" several times in the book of Romans. In fact, Paul said "by nature" the Gentiles do the things contained in the law. Is that evil? 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: Your prOBlem is that you have listened to what other people told you, and not read the scriptures. If you read the scriptures you would know that Original Sin is completely false. Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: Here Paul said that homosexuality goes against man's nature. This sin is "unnatural" for men, heterosexuality is "natural". If men were sinners by nature, the exact opposite would be true, homosexuality would be natural. If men were sinners by nature, then no one would arrest a person for stealing or murder, as that would be perfectly normal. People do not think.
  12. What you see is the "flesh". The flesh simply wants what it wants. The flesh cannot choose, it simply pulls and tugs us toward sin. The scriptures say Jesus came in the flesh, and that he was tempted in "all points" as we are. Did Jesus have a sin nature? And again, Satan, the fallen angels, and Adam and Eve were all "very good" (Gen 1:31) yet they had lustful desires and were able to sin. So, the fact that we sin does not prove we have a sin nature, only that we have free will. And God does not hold children accountable until they understand right from wrong. Deu 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it. When the Jews sinned against God, God cursed them so that they would not enter the promised land. But he let the little children enter in, which is a figure of heaven. Why? Because they had no "knowledge" between good and evil in that day that their parents sinned. So, little children might do wrong, but God does not hold them accountable until they understand their actions. God spared Nineveh because there were 120,000 little children there who could not discern between their right and left hand, and much cattle. Jon 4:10 Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night: 11 And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle? God's question to Jonah implies a YES answer, that God SHOULD spare Nineveh. Why? Because there were more than 120,000 innocent little children who could not discern between their right hand and left hand there. They were no more guilty of sin than the cattle that cannot sin. Jesus NEVER spoke evil of little children, only good. Jesus told his disciples they must be converted and become as little children to enter heaven. Jesus said little children have angels who always behold his Father's face. Was Jesus telling his disciples they must become filthy little sinners to enter heaven? Nonsense. Was Jesus teaching that filthy little sinners have guardian angels? Absurd! Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Mat 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. People believe the false teachings of Augustine and Calvin who followed him because they do not know the scriptures. Original Sin is total falsehood refuted by MUCH scripture.
  13. Physical death, yes, spiritual death, NO. God does not impute any person's sin to another person. Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. The Jews were forbidden to punish a son for his father's sin and vice versa. If God were to punish us for Adam's sin he would be a hypocrite breaking his own laws! Jesus hated hypocrites. Deu 24:16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. God said "every man" shall be put to death for his "own sin". Original sin goes completely against God's word. Yes, all men die physically for Adam's sin, but this is actually a blessing. If God did not cause man to die physically he would live forever in sin. It is the fear of dying that is our greatest incentive to trust in Christ, Most men are very reluctant to trust in Jesus as it is, imagine if there was no physical death, no man would turn to God. So in a sense, physical death is good and a blessing toward man.
  14. Out loud? LOL. It's alright, I can be very controversial in my views. But one thing you will find out, I will ALWAYS present scripture to support what I believe. Folks OFTEN tell me I am wrong, but almost NEVER tell me why.
  15. Do you believe Jesus Christ had to be filled with the Holy Spirit? Well yes, because Jesus said he had to come to John the Baptist and be baptized. I am not sure why, but Jesus implied that it was necessary. Mat 3:13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him. 14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. 16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him: 17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Now, I do not understand why Jesus had to be baptized, but Jesus seemed to imply it was necessary, and that is good enough for me. As for the Spirit descending upon him, why would he need the Spirit to descend upon him if he already had the indwelling Spirit? I mean, the Spirit fell on believers on Pentacost, but they did not have the indwelling Spirit until that day. I agree that it was a sign for the Spirit to descend upon Jesus, but I also believe he needed the Spirit to perform miracles. He did not perform any miracles until the Spirit descended upon him. He seems to have been operating as a normal man under the influence of the Holy Ghost as the OT prophets were. I might be wrong, Jesus said the Father dwelleth in him, so perhaps the Spirit did as well. But then again, perhaps not, I am not sure. Do you take this for some need of the Holy Spirit in Jesus Christ? I believe so, I think Jesus came as a man. He had to defeat Satan where Adam failed. It is nothing for God to defeat Satan, but it is quite a feat for a man to defeat Satan. I believe Jesus had to defeat Satan the way a man would, by faith and OBedience to God's word. There is scripture to support my view. Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. I believe Jesus had to defeat Satan as a man to redeem man. He had to become like us in every way. Men in the OT did not have the indwelling Spirit, but they did have the Spirit "upon" them, and I think Jesus had to war against Satan in this fashion to defeat him. God certainly cannot die, but Jesus defeated Satan "through death". What point, theory, or new doctrine are you attempting to forward? None whatsoever. I am just saying that Acts 2:33 seems to say Jesus received the Holy Ghost after he ascended, and then he was able to give the Spirit out to believers. Jesus told his disciples he must go away to give them the Spirit. Now, he HAD to sprinkle his blood on the mercy seat, otherwise men's sins were not atoned for. Perhaps this is all he meant. But Jesus told his disciples to wait for the Spirit. Acts 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. Now, the first phrase absolutely says Jesus "being by the right hand of God exalted". That is speaking about something God the Father did for Jesus, not believers. Next, the word "and" connects the second phrase to the first and strongly implies that not only was Jesus exalted by his Father, but he also received the Holy Ghost from him. Grammar is grammar, that word "and" has real meaning. I just want to know what scripture really says, I am not trying to forward some new doctrine. I assure you I am not the first person to question this verse. I would be willing to bet that many thousands have questioned this verse exactly as I have.
  16. Well Jordan, I do not purposely cause trouble, but I invariably cause trouble because I ask hard questions people do not like. I simply do not accept what I am told simply because that is what people have always believed. I read the scriptures, and I ask God to show me the true meaning of scripture. I am not claiming infallibility, far from it. But if I see scripture that OBviously does not agree with what is being taught in church, I am going to question it. Folks do not like this, folks grow comfortable being taught by others, and they do not like it when someone like me rocks the boat. Too bad.
  17. Well, most importantly you are blaming God for sin. Original Sin doesn't even make sense. If God hates sin, why would he curse us to be sinners? That is ridiculous. Calvinism teaches that God cursed us so we lost the free will to do true good. Does that make sense? We put criminals in jail so they cannot continue to go around hurting people and committing more crime. Wouldn't it make more sense if God took away our free will to do evil? I mean, if God really hates sin, why would he curse us so that we MUST sin? People do not think. The scriptures nowhere teach that God cursed us to be sinners. Ask folks to show you from scripture, they can't do it.
  18. It's compelling because it's TRUE. Romans 5:12-21 is not teaching Original Sin. Verse 14 proves that without a doubt. It directly says men from Adam to Moses HAD NOT sinned after the similitude of Adam. There is another famous verse that shows this as well. Romans 9:11; Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) Original Sin teaches that all men sinned "in Adam". Augustine believed we were all seminally present in Adam's loins and actually participated in his sin when he ate the forbidden fruit. Folks base this on Hebrews 7:9-10; Heb 7:9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham. 10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him. OK, first of all, how many sins had JacOB and Esau committed while they were in their mother's womb according to Romans 9:11? NONE, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA! If you believe that Paul was teaching all men sinned with Adam being in his loins, then you would have to believe that Paul completely forgot this fact when he said JacOB and Esau had neither done good "or evil" in Romans 9:11. I don't really believe Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit would make a mistake like this, do you? And if Hebrews 7:9-10 is literal, you have opened a real can of worms. Why, because it says Levi paid tithes in his grandfather Abraham's loins, not Adam! That would mean we are not only guilty of Adam's sin, but ALL of our grandfather's sins! But wait, it gets worse. Was it a sin for Abraham to pay tithes to Melchisedec? NO, it was good! It was an act of righteous worship. So not only would we be guilty of all our grandfather's sins, if our grandfathers believed and were saved, we would be saved too! No, this is the ridiculous "Federal Headship" theory that did not even exist until the 16th century. It has no basis in scripture. Dr. Hargood also wrote of this ridiculous theory; http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2013/01/adam-harwood-and-jw-macgormans-dangerous-unorthodox-doctrine-inevitably-leading-to-heresy-if-not-worse.html Original Sin is a false doctrine created by men without a word of support in scripture. This false doctrine has introduced more error into the church than any other such as baptizing babies and the Immaculate Conception. One error leads to another and on and on and on.
  19. This verse is hyperbole and should not be taken literally. There has never been a child born that could instantly speak, much less tell lies which involves "intent" If you are going to interpret verse 3 literally, then you need to interpret the verses following it literally as well. Psa 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. 4 Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear; 5 Which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so wisely. 6 Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O LORD. 7 Let them melt away as waters which run continually: when he bendeth his bow to shoot his arrows, let them be as cut in pieces. 8 As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun. Is verse 3 speaking of all men? NOPE, it is speaking of "the wicked". Go down to verses 10 and 11 and David speaks of "the righteous" 10 The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked. 11 So that a man shall say, Verily there is a reward for the righteous: verily he is a God that judgeth in the earth. So, David was not speaking of "all men" in verse 3. In verse 4 David says the wicked are poisonous like an adder and deaf too. Are babies poisonous like an adder? That sure would make breastfeeding dangerous. How about verse 6? Here David says the wicked have great teeth like young lions. Are babies born with a mouthful of huge teeth? Again, breastfeeding sure would be dangerous if this Psalm is to be taken literally. How about verses 7 and 8? Do babies melt like snails? Better keep them away from salt! And do you really believe David was praying for all babies everywhere to pass away? Absurd. So, to take this Psalm literally and use it to form doctinre is ridiculous and foolish. This scripture is poetry and hyperbole or extreme exaggeration and should not be taken literally. Folks do not use the brains they were born with, and foolishly believe what others tell them without thinking.
  20. Now I will address Romans 5:12-21, a very famous passage commonly used to "prove" Original Sin. I will show you from scripture that Romans 5;12-21 does not prove Original Sin, in fact, it refutes it. Rom 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: 13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 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. Does Romans 5:12 say a sin nature passed on all men? NO, it says DEATH passed upon all men, FOR THAT ALL HAVE SINNED. It is a fact that Augustine used a flawed Latin text that said "in whom" in verse 12, that he mistakenly interpreted to mean Adam. Almost all Greek scholars admit that the scriptures Augustine used gave a flawed intepretation, and that this verse should say, "because all have sinned" or "for that all have sinned" showing that men die because of PERSONAL sin, not Adam. This is a historical fact. Dr. J. W. “Jack” MacGorman, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of New Testament at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary for over 56 years wrote this concerning Augustine's interpretation of Romans 5:12-21; http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/peter_lumpkins/2013/01/adam-harwood-and-jw-macgormans-dangerous-unorthodox-doctrine-inevitably-leading-to-heresy-if-not-worse.html It was Augustine who first attempted to develop the concept of Original Sin from the scriptures. Unfortunately, he was using a flawed Latin text that implied death passed on all men because of Adam's sin, but that is not what Romans 5:12 says in the Greek. The Greek fathers NEVER agreed with Augustine's interpretation. This is HISTORICAL FACT. Next, does verse 14 say that all men sinned Adam's sin in the garden? NO, it very specifically says they HAD NOT sinned in the similitude of Adam's sin. If we were all in Adam's loins as some falsely teach, we would be guilty of Adam's EXACT sin. Verse 14 clearly refutes this error. And note that verse 14 mentions only men from Adam to Moses. This is solid PROOF that Romans 5:12-21 is not addressing the subject of Original Sin whatsoever, because if it was, it would apply to ALL MEN, not men from Adam to Moses only. No, what Paul is really saying is that the fact all men from Adam to Moses died PROVES sin was in the world. But in verse 13 Paul says sin is not imputed when there is no law. So why did men from Adam to Moses spiritually die? Because they broke the law written on their hearts that Paul showed in chapter 2. Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; 13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. 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: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) Paul had already explained in chapter 2 that men "without law" shall perish "without law". Why? Because all men by "nature" have the law written on their hearts. This is why men from Adam to Moses who had no written law perished. They DID NOT sin after the similitude of Adam's sin, that would be impossible, as no man had access to the tree of knowledge of good and evil after Adam and Eve were banished from the garden. Lastly, if Romans 5:12-21 is teaching that all men are made sinners unconditionally because Adam sinned, then verses 18-19 must also teach that all men are unconditionally made righteous because of Christ's OBedience. 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. 19 For as by one man's disOBedience many were made sinners, so by the OBedience of one shall many be made righteous. You cannot violate Paul's form of argument in Romans 5:12-21. What applies to the first phrase must also apply to the second phrase in each verse. You cannot teach that Adam's sin is unconditionally imputed to all men, and then Jesus's righteousness is conditionally imputed to those that believe. That violates Paul's form of argument. You have only two options to be consistent. #1 Adam's sin is "unconditionally" imputed to all men, likewise Jesus's righteousness is "unconditionally" imputed to all men. This would lead to Universalism, and Rom 5:18-19 is in fact the chief proof text used by Universalists. We know from scripture this interpretation is error, the scriptures are clear that not all men will be saved. #2 Adam's sin and condemnation is "conditionally" imputed to all men when they willingly and knowingly sin as Adam did, and Jesus's righteousness is "conditionally" imputed to all men who believe on Jesus as Jesus trusted his Father to raise him from the dead. #2 is the correct interpretation. When we knowingly and willingly sin as Adam did, we are judged or made "sinners" as Adam was, and those men who trust Jesus are judged or made "righteous" as Jesus was righteous because he trusted his Father to raise him from the dead. What Paul is teaching is what is known as "Legal Precedent". In law, a legal precedent is when the law uses a case (usually the first case) as a precedent or authority establishing a principle or rule that a court or other judical body adopts when deciding later cases involving similar issues or facts. This guarantees equal treatment and fairness under the law. So, however the first person who broke a law was treated, the law will normally use this as a standard in future cases. If the first person to break a law got 5 years in jail, persons who commit the same crime will most likely be given the same sentence. And this is what Romans 5 is teaching. When we sin as Adam, we are imputed "sinners" and sentenced to death, when we believe as Jesus we are imputed "righteous" and given the free gift of justification unto life. Romans 5:12-21 DOES NOT support Original Sin. Rightly interpreted it absolutely refutes it.
  21. This verse does not say man is born with a sin nature. The scriptures show man "corrupts' himself. The definition of corrupt means to go from good to bad, as when fruit spoils. Scripture shows man "corrupts" himself, or "goes astray" or "becomes filthy". This shows a progression from good to evil. Gen 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away. Psa 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. 2 The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. 3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Does the Bible teach we are born sinful? NO, the Bible shows the very opposite, that God made man upright, but man has "corrupted" himself, he has "gone aside", he has "become filthy". All these show a progression from good to evil. Even the figures show a progression from good to evil. No clothing starts out filthy, no clothing starts out as a rag. Our sins have caused our cloke of righteousness to "become filthy" and torn. No leaf starts out dead. All leaves start out green and alive. It is our sin that causes our leaf to fade and die, our sin takes us away like the wind takes dead leaves away in the fall. But no leaf starts out dead and withered. The truth is right in front of your eyes, but false doctrine has blinded you. Men are not born sinful, but all men willingly choose to sin and become filthy.
  22. Well, that is certainly your prerogative, but you are going to miss out on some interesting discussions. I have been accused of many things on forums, but being boring or afraid to address controversial subjects is not one of them.
  23. Calvinism is founded on deception. Calvinist preachers will declare to unbelievers that Jesus died for "sinners", for the purpose of giving that person the false impression Jesus died for them personally, when the Calvinist preacher has no way to know if Jesus died for that person or not. Calvinists constantly play word games with people like this. If a Calvinist preacher was honest, he would tell people that Jesus only died for "some" sinners, and that he has no idea who those persons are. His listeners MIGHT be one of the fortunate people Jesus died for, but the higher prOBability is that they are not. And if a Calvinist preacher was REALLY forthcoming, he would tell you he is not even sure he is one of the fortunate elect. He thinks he is because he believes NOW, but he must endure and persevere to his last breath to know for sure. Even then he cannot know if his works were good enough to qualify him as a true believer. Truth is, a Calvinist cannot even know if he believes. A Calvinist is taught that an unregenerate person cannot understand or perform anything spiritual, so he has no idea what REAL saving belief is. Spiritual matters are all a big mystery to the Calvinist. Do I really believe? Who knows? How can I know? Calvinism is designed to cause a person to doubt, not believe.
  24. You do not know if it was God's will that YOU should come to repentance if Limited Atonement is true. John Calvin taught that God himself deceives persons to believe they are elect when they in fact are not. According to Calvin, just because you believe you are elect does not make it so. How do you know you are elect? Was your name on a list somewhere? You see, non-Cals can have confidence that Jesus assuredly died for us PERSONALLY. You cannot know that. And just because you believe you are elect does not make it so. And yes, I believe that Jesus died for Hitler's sins, and Judas Iscariot's sins as well. I believe Jesus died for all men's sins.
×
×
  • Create New...