Ephesians 2:8 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:” with a dollop of "free will".

As I said above, the soul and the spirit are not precisely the same. Animals are souls (Hebrew - nephesh, see Genesis 1:21,24). Human beings are also souls (Hebrew - nephesh, see Genesis 2:7).

When speaking of human beings, the references to soul and to spirit are often used interchangeably.

I believe the best view is that human beings are souls who have a body and a spirit. Animals are souls that have a body.
Not a distinction I've thought about...but at first glance I'm inclined to think, so what? I'm not ready to change my faith over it, or to deny the Spirit who led me to it, :)

[ASIDE!
BUT have you ever noticed that animals are evil, not just man?

Are animals sinful?
1. The serpent was said to be cunning in evil ABOVE the rest of the animals which implies they are sinful lite so to speak, compared to him, ie, in the garden before Eve ate the fruit. Who created them that way???

2. The serpent was cursed ABOVE the other animals which implies they got a lighter curse for their sin than the serpent got.

3. The animals were cursed by the flood along with mankind for their wickedness and violence, Gen 6:5-7.

Does that not imply that they have made a free will decisions to rebel against YHWH??? Does that have any implications to your fine tuned distinctions? How could there be evil animals in the garden and GOD pronounced it "all very good!" ??

END ASIDE]
 
No sir!
Original sin refers to the [***] theology that blames all sin in humans as proceeding from Adam's fall by the will of GOD, a theology I stand against fully as a blasphemy.
Good. to that we both agree.
ImCo, we are only sinful by our own choice to rebel against
GOD. Adam's fall had no effect upon us at all.
Again, we both agree.
We are born into Adam for his death, not his sin,
I don't know what that might even mean.
so that Christ may die once for all elect sinners and not have to die for each one, one by one, over and over again, Rom 5:12.
Of course, Christ died for the sins of the world, the whole world, each and every single person. I don't know what Romans 5:12 has to do with that.
Your problem, since you have gone personal :), is your adherence to the mistaken belief / interpretation that our conception is our creation and not just the method of sowing us into Adam, Matt 13:36-39.
I don't believe we are created in the sense of created by God ex nihilo. We are born through the natural process of procreation giving us our natural flesh and blood bodies. Our spirits come directly from God formed, or created, in us at some time before birth; I personally believe that time is the moment when blood first begins to be pumped by the heart which is at or near four weeks after conception.

Again, I don't know exactly what you might mean by "sowing us into Adam".
 
The soul is technically not the spirit. The human being, like all the rest of the animal kingdom, is a soul; but the human being, unlike all the rest of the animal kingdom, has a spirit formed in him by God.
Technically the We are souls, living in a body and we have spirits.

Tripartite man.

Man: A Tripartite Being with Body, Soul and Spirit​

May 3, 2018 by Alice
How many parts are there to a man? The Bible says that man consists of three component parts: body, soul and spirit. Man is a triune being because he is created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27), who Himself is a Trinity. But what is the difference between the body, soul and spirit?

But this view has often caused confusion in the minds of Christians. While soul and spirit are so closely related that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish accurately between them, the Bible makes it clear that they are not the same; they’re divisible.

See the link for an in-depth explanation.

 
Just asking.

Could ..."And we are sinful because of Adam. That’s why we sin,"... because God, the Heavenly Father, within his plans for the creation of life instilled the option within man of choice, all the while knowing that man would fail simply because it was part of His plan,... therefore as he always instructed them in the old testament about the required blood sacrifices to demonstrate the seriousness of sin and the need for atonement, as sin carries a grave penalty. That shedding of blood symbolizes the cost of sin and the principle of substitution, where an innocent life is given for the guilty.... However it was not sufficient as blood atonement in the old testament ... while commanded.... was temporary and was ultimately imperfect... That He sent us his Son to be our permanent sacrifice... because it was all a part of His plan from the very beginning of His idea for doing this that Jesus's blood covered those who believe ??????

Yes... I have a suggested reason for this, but it is for another thread and another time.

If you disagree.... fine. But I do not believe that the man Adam was made any differently then we are.... And I do believe that Adam was made for a very specific reason.

You say..." That’s why we sin, because we’re sinful in nature of our character." Is it possible for us not to sin? NO. ...Why? ...because it is part of our nature. Remove all temptations and stimulations, then maybe. But it is a true work.... this repentance thing... and we ARE told to repent.

I digress...

Bye...
@TedT

You gave me a frowning face. Why?
 
It mentions All the sons of GOD - which I was sure you considered yourself to be and here you are.
Isa did not consider the Sons of God to be humans, because humans did not yet exist! In the OT, especially Job, “Sons of God”refers to the angel class in general. (Job 1:7, 2:1, 38: 7)

It’s bad hermetics to apply the meaning of NT times to OT uses. “Cool” today can refer to temperature, temperament or a degree of acceptability but 100 years ago it only meant temperature.

Isaiah had no awareness of NT concepts for Sons of God, therefore, that’s not what he meant.

Doug
 
Not a proof of his creation,
When it’s talking about creation, yes it is!

an interpretation, [if] a 'soul' is a spirit in a body rather than free of the body.

So you are a pre-reformation Catholic, perhaps an Augustinian at heart...

Orthodoxy is not truth, it is accepted opinion which may or may not be true:
or·tho·dox
/ˈôrTHəˌdäks/

adjective

  1. 1.
    (of a person or their views, especially religious or political ones, or other beliefs or practices) conforming to what is generally or traditionally accepted as right or true; established and approved.
Does godly truth change? If God is the same yesterday, today and forever, is not what he considers truth also the same? Is something God called evil in the beginning of time no longer evil today?

We may argue over what is “true” as humans, but God does not have any doubts as to truth and falsehood.

Doug
 
...and I have pointed out that a lot of important theology does not fit the model of specific textual evidence.
You’re moving the goal post; this is a hermeneutical question not of theological one. The text doesn’t mention humans, and the language used does not and cannot be used in reference to humans in the historical context of the writing.

If your hermeneutic is valid, the Son’s of God might include hobbits or elves. These are things that didn’t exist at the point of context in Isaiah’s writing.


Doug
 
Man: A Tripartite Being
Umm, so which conundrum of Christian politics and theology is this supposed to address?

Not the JW idea that sin is a mere consequence of creation and not the result of ONLY a free will decision to rebel against our LORD...?

Whether I am a soul who sinned or a spirit who sinned - I am only born under the consequences of sin, ie, liable to death and suffering, by my own FREE WILL choice to rebel against YHWH!!!
 
@TedT

You gave me a frowning face. Why?
For this bit;
Could ..."And we are sinful because of Adam. That’s why we sin,"... because God, the Heavenly Father, within his plans for the creation of life instilled the option within man of choice, all the while knowing that man would fail simply because it was part of His plan,...

...because I reject this current favourite doctrine as contrary to the LOVE and JUSTICE of our LORD! :)
 
If your hermeneutic is valid, the Son’s of God might include hobbits or elves. These are things that didn’t exist at the point of context in Isaiah’s writing.
IF they were created in HIS image and able to be HIS Bride I welcome them wholeheartedly and accept that they must have been so created even though your imagination is stultified, :)
 
Wesley was persecuted as a heretic by the Church, right? So doctrines of orthodoxy do change, right?

I just googled Wesleyan doctrine and I think at first look I must be a Wesleyan deep inside my non-salvatorian by play about how we became sinners and how the current favourite doctrines about our creation, fall and experience on earth fail HIS holiness, sigh.
 
Last edited:
Wesley was persecuted as a heretic by the Church, right?
No, not in any real sense of persecution. There were a couple of Calvinists with whom he had some very sharp disagreements, most notably, Augustus Toplady, whose most famous hymn, Rock of Ages, was written in part as a rebuttal against what he thought Wesley was teaching. Ironically, Rock of Ages is loved and sung by Wesleyans around the world without the slightest qualm.

They both wrote and published pamphlets against each other, a practice not becoming a Christian imho. We’ve all allowed our better judgements to be set aside from time to time, but I hope they are few in number and infrequent in occurrence.

Wesley died at age 87, without being jailed or beaten by his detractors.

Doug
 
Back
Top Bottom