FOUR reasons I believe in the sinful nature. (original sin/ancestral sin/total depravity)

[TomL]

I surely did. Adam is dead.... right? Is his bones with us now?

Um had you not originally denied physical death?

This conversation is not going well .

It began with me believing you had denied physical death,

and I have simply asked questions to see what your view is, not to establish my view

 

[TomL]

In one sense, anything can be read into Scripture depending on your starting presuppositions, and everyone presupposes things.

False doctrines do have their supporting verses and sometimes they can seem like in some way they support them.

This is why we must turn to earnest prayer when we read Scripture or our very own hearts will deceive us.

Reading into scripture is not a case of scripture supporting something

 

[synergy]

Canaanites are non-Hebrew. Another word for that is "Gentile."

Canaanites are not Egyptians, Syrians, Assyrians, Arabs, Turks, etc... Looks like your ethnic cleansing dark spirit is blinded by its insatiable blood thirstiness. Tell it to take a hike.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Um had you not originally denied physical death?

This conversation is not going well .

It began with me believing you had denied physical death,

and I have simply asked questions to see what your view is, not to establish my view

I don't know how you can misunderstand what I wrote.

Physical death robs man of the experiences of this life. Surely you see this as being a judgment upon Adam. Thusly, most everyone must rightly recognize the teaching you follow (and most do) requires double jeopardy or duel judgements of Adam.

If Jesus died for sin yet still lived, then what does that equal in the actual judgement for sin?

I know these are difficult questions but they are essential questions. Very few people actually face meaningful questions relative the defense of the faith anymore.

Knowledge has increased. Many people desire answers they're not getting from us today. I admit that I'm aggravated about this. It is meaningful to me. All I see is deception all around me with few to stand against it. (not that I believe I'm alone. I'm not). Some of this matters and some of it doesn't. I try to stay where it matters......

This world is at a point where the Truth of God "hangs in the balance". We are at a "tipping point" where evil is overcoming good. There is needless suffering all around us because of what we falsely believe.

I don't have anything against you nor anyone else. I had these types of debates 25 years ago. I know what I believe. What I believe fits together in the context of the Revelation of God to humanity. I enjoy sharing that.

 

[TomL]

I don't know how you can misunderstand what I wrote.

Physical death robs man of the experiences of this life. Surely you see this as being a judgment upon Adam. Thusly, most everyone must rightly recognize the teaching you follow (and most do) requires double jeopardy or duel judgements of Adam.

When you wrote

"What if I said that Adam's sin that brought about physical death wasn't to eat of the tree?"

 

[TomL]

In one sense, anything can be read into Scripture depending on your starting presuppositions, and everyone presupposes things.

False doctrines do have their supporting verses and sometimes they can seem like in some way they support them.

This is why we must turn to earnest prayer when we read Scripture or our very own hearts will deceive us.

Again reading into scripture is not evidence.

 

[TedT]

You are forgetting about God's Foreknowledge. God can see past the blind man's conception and into his future where his current sins reside.

Not forgetting omniscience, just thinking it must be re-thought as the
Augustinian definitions which have ruled the church are certainly pagan, not godly...

Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

The idea that HIS omniscience means that HE knows all that can be known from eternity past to eternity future is a pagan Greek philosophical idea that crept into the Church and supported the blasphemy that GOD knew who would go to perdition before HE created them but created them anyway.

Much better is the Biblical definition:
Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
This limits HIS omniscience to 'all HIS works' and it started at 'the beginning of the world.' All HIS works describe HIS creative decrees.

This suggests that if HE did not decree something into creation, HE did not know it...and I contend HE did not decree the results of our true free will decisions so HE did not know what those results would be until we decided them for our selves.

GOD does not take pleasure in the deaths of anyone: Ezekiel 33:11 Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take NO PLEASURE in the death of the wicked... yet GOD does only that which gives HIM pleasure so...why would HE create people knowing they would end in hell when He has no desire for them to do so?

Also, HE wants all people to be saved, 1 Timothy 2:4...who WANTS all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. so whether HE will get this want fulfilled or not, HE obviously did NOT create anyone without the possibility for salvation, ie, destined to hell at creation!

All HE had to do to ensure that hell was empty according to HIS pleasures and wants was to not create those whom HE foreknew would end there!!! That some do end in hell would therefore imply that HE did NOT know where they would end up when they were created!

GOD knows with a full and complete knowledge everything HE decrees to exist or to happen, that is, all HIS works. GOD also knows fully that which HE has not decreed to exist or to happen as possibilities, with complete knowledge.

Pre-Conception Existence Theology contends that GOD, by sovereign decree, created all of us with the ability to make true free will decisions, but HE did NOT decree the results of those choices so HE knew what we would choose perfectly only as possibilities.

So, I contend that GOD's omniscience covers:
1. all of reality; that is, all that HE ever decreed to be created, that is, all HIS works.
2. all of possibility; that is, every possible permutation of the nature of the future was known to HIM but not decreed by HIM.

So, I claim HIS omniscience is full and complete.

BUT I also contend that by HIS sovereignty, HE did not decree which possibility any of the spirits created in HIS image would choose, leaving that decision up to their own choice based upon their faith, their unproven hope for their happiness, Heb 11: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. ie unproven.

Does anyone argue that GOD cannot not decree which possibility will be chosen by a created person? GOD's will is sovereign and IF He does not decree which possibility will be chosen that is HIS will and it is righteous.

Therefore, in this manner, HE did not create, predestine, the FATE of anyone before their creation nor before their decision to accept HIM or to reject HIM as GOD, and the fate HE predestined them to was in perfect accord with their own true free will decision, made by faith, ie an unproven hope, before the earth was created.

Earthly LIFE on the other hand is predestined and predetermined to bring HIS sinful elect to redemption and to holiness by using the tares as the supreme bad example of the result of turning from GOD.

 

[TedT]

So you're good and came into your human body external to the this world? That is what you're saying. Doesn't that make you divine?

I don't believe you understand what you're saying.

You quote the Book of Wisdom as if I accept it which I HAVE ALREADY TOLD EVERYONE I DO NOT...

Over and over I have said ONLY SINNERS are sown into this world, both elect sinners (HIS sheep gone astray into sin and the sinful people of HIS kingdom) and the eternally fallen reprobate sinners but ONLY sinners. The holy elect angels are not sown into mankind.

Where does the Bible say that sinners were flung to earth?
I read it in Rev 12:4 His tail swept a third of the stars from the sky, tossing them to the earth. right before his war with the holy angels. Since Satan had power over them to cast them down, I suggest they must have been sinners so I ask: "Why did Satan cast down sinners who could have helped him in his coming war with GOD?"

Perhaps they are sinners but they would not fight for him so he discarded them as useless to his cause?

To cast, fling, down is
S906. balló: to throw, cast down and in this verse it apparently includes the ideas of the use of force and effort: to smite one with slaps, to buffet... The animosity of this verb is echoed in v9 where it repeated twice: Rev 12:7 Then a war broke out in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his angels fought back. 8 But the dragon was not strong enough, and no longer was any place found in heaven for him and his angels. 9 And the great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him.

Satan hurled these sinners to the earth with the same hostile emotion that Michael et al hurled him and his demons to the earth.

Well, the only sinners I can think of that are useless to Satan are Christ's sheep who went astray into sin, the sinful people of the kingdom called the good seed.

This interpretation does no disvalue to the words as written but only conflicts with the preconceived ideology of some sectarian beliefs... This might be a case of "It is written right there but some can't or won't see it."

And, if you have a theory about there being other sinners beside the reprobate demons and the sinful elect people of the kingdom, I'll peruse your argument.

 

[synergy]

Not forgetting omniscience, just thinking it must be re-thought as the
Augustinian definitions which have ruled the church are certainly pagan, not godly...

Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.

The idea that HIS omniscience means that HE knows all that can be known from eternity past to eternity future is a pagan Greek philosophical idea that crept into the Church and supported the blasphemy that GOD knew who would go to perdition before HE created them but created them anyway.

Much better is the Biblical definition:
Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.
This limits HIS omniscience to 'all HIS works' and it started at 'the beginning of the world.' All HIS works describe HIS creative decrees.

This suggests that if HE did not decree something into creation, HE did not know it...and I contend HE did not decree the results of our true free will decisions so HE did not know what those results would be until we decided them for our selves.

GOD does not take pleasure in the deaths of anyone: Ezekiel 33:11 Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take NO PLEASURE in the death of the wicked... yet GOD does only that which gives HIM pleasure so...why would HE create people knowing they would end in hell when He has no desire for them to do so?

Also, HE wants all people to be saved, 1 Timothy 2:4...who WANTS all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. so whether HE will get this want fulfilled or not, HE obviously did NOT create anyone without the possibility for salvation, ie, destined to hell at creation!

All HE had to do to ensure that hell was empty according to HIS pleasures and wants was to not create those whom HE foreknew would end there!!! That some do end in hell would therefore imply that HE did NOT know where they would end up when they were created!

GOD knows with a full and complete knowledge everything HE decrees to exist or to happen, that is, all HIS works. GOD also knows fully that which HE has not decreed to exist or to happen as possibilities, with complete knowledge.

Pre-Conception Existence Theology contends that GOD, by sovereign decree, created all of us with the ability to make true free will decisions, but HE did NOT decree the results of those choices so HE knew what we would choose perfectly only as possibilities.

So, I contend that GOD's omniscience covers:
1. all of reality; that is, all that HE ever decreed to be created, that is, all HIS works.
2. all of possibility; that is, every possible permutation of the nature of the future was known to HIM but not decreed by HIM.

So, I claim HIS omniscience is full and complete.

BUT I also contend that by HIS sovereignty, HE did not decree which possibility any of the spirits created in HIS image would choose, leaving that decision up to their own choice based upon their faith, their unproven hope for their happiness, Heb 11: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. ie unproven.

Does anyone argue that GOD cannot not decree which possibility will be chosen by a created person? GOD's will is sovereign and IF He does not decree which possibility will be chosen that is HIS will and it is righteous.

Therefore, in this manner, HE did not create, predestine, the FATE of anyone before their creation nor before their decision to accept HIM or to reject HIM as GOD, and the fate HE predestined them to was in perfect accord with their own true free will decision, made by faith, ie an unproven hope, before the earth was created.

Earthly LIFE on the other hand is predestined and predetermined to bring HIS sinful elect to redemption and to holiness by using the tares as the supreme bad example of the result of turning from GOD.

At first iteration through your comments, I tend to agree. I don't see anything that I would vehemently disagree with.

Rom 9:22-23 explains alot to me of why evil is tolerated by God for now:

22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,
23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory,

 

[TedT]

Would you deny God's law is commanded?

Giving a command or law does not make one a sinner.

There simply is no value in such an argument

I have previously quoted in this topic the reason for the law as written in scripture was not to fence in HIS faithful but to convict the sinner of his need to repent and turn to his saviour...to open his eyes to his sinfulness, as it were.

Show me where have I contended that GOD's law is not commanded? Too weird, this phrase makes no sense to me...especially when I have written that I accept the command not to eat was a law so should be recognized as applying to sinners to convict them of sin:
Timothy 1:9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, etc, etc. which tells us clearly that the law was NOT given to the righteous to steer their decision but to the sinful to convict them of their sin as is written in
Rom 3:20 Therefore no one will be justified in His sight by works of the law. For the law merely brings awareness of sin. which suggests that the command to not eat was given to sinners to convict them of their sinfulness which it did, very well.

 

[TedT]

Like Calvinism, Universalism and Pelagianism, I do think PCE can solve our feelings of God committing injustice.

However, we must simply put the Word over and above our own selfish preferences and fallen inclinations.

But you are not asking me to put the word of GOD over my own selfish preferences at all...you are asking me to put your (selfish?) preferences for the interpretation of the word over what I have been taught and have accepted as my preferred interpretation of what the word really means.

And, I don't believe that Calvinism, Universalism and Pelagianism solve any of the injustices their interpretations implies GOD commits, they just hide from them by doublethink.

 

[Dizerner]

But you are not asking me to put the word of GOD over my own selfish preferences at all...you are asking me to put your (selfish?) preferences for the interpretation of the word over what I have been taught and have accepted as my preferred interpretation of what the word really means.

It is your God-given right to think evil of a person, even when there is no evil there.

And, I don't believe that Calvinism, Universalism and Pelagianism solve any of the injustices their interpretations implies GOD commits, they just hide from them by doublethink.

There are varying degrees of injustice people are willing to put up with.

Even your system has injustices in it if you think deeply about it.

 

[TomL]

I have previously quoted in this topic the reason for the law as written in scripture was not to fence in HIS faithful but to convict the sinner of his need to repent and turn to his saviour...to open his eyes to his sinfulness, as it were.

Show me where have I contended that GOD's law is not commanded? Too weird, this phrase makes no sense to me...especially when I have written that I accept the command not to eat was a law so should be recognized as applying to sinners to convict them of sin:
Timothy 1:9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, etc, etc. which tells us clearly that the law was NOT given to the righteous to steer their decision but to the sinful to convict them of their sin as is written in
Rom 3:20 Therefore no one will be justified in His sight by works of the law. For the law merely brings awareness of sin. which suggests that the command to not eat was given to sinners to convict them of their sinfulness which it did, very well.

Again Christ was born under the law.

His being born under the law did not make him a sinner.

 

[TedT]

There are varying degrees of injustice people are willing to put up with.

Even your system has injustices in it if you think deeply about it.

If I can't see them, I can't work on reconciling them with true justice. Would you point out those you see for me?

 

[TedT]

Again Christ was born under the law.

His being born under the law did not make him a sinner.

Again - Christ is a unique case, a divine incarnate...NOT an ordinary human. What effect would a law designed to make someone conscious of their sinfulness do for a perfectly moral, righteous, being??? Nothing at all - but that does not obviate the meaning of the verses I quote for the rest of us sinners.

 

[TomL]

Again - Christ is a unique case, a divine incarnate...NOT an ordinary human. What effect would a law designed to make someone conscious of their sinfulness do for a perfectly moral, righteous, being??? Nothing at all - but that does not obviate the meaning of the verses I quote for the rest of us sinners.

A case which disproves your argument

It is a breaking of the law that is sin, not the institution of it.

 

[TomL]

Again - Christ is a unique case, a divine incarnate...NOT an ordinary human. What effect would a law designed to make someone conscious of their sinfulness do for a perfectly moral, righteous, being??? Nothing at all - but that does not obviate the meaning of the verses I quote for the rest of us sinners.

Christ had to live as a man under the law

He did so.

Nowhere does the bible state because God gave a command then all commanded were already sinners

Sin is breaking the law

One sin when one breaks the law