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

[TomL]

Yeah. Like that this is the first time I heard this......

Being made UNDER.... and paying attention to that word "UNDER" the law is to suffer the judgement of the law.

You know, Christ DIED.... Might that be "under the law". The judgement of death fulfilled in the sentence of the law? Not keeping the law. Not confined by the law....

SUFFERING THE JUDGEMENT OF THE LAW.

Please understand you're missing so much here because of what you've been taught. Don't quote the "Teacher's Bible Commentary" to me. Whomever wrote that should be here defending it. You shouldn't even be trying to defend it. Defend the Scriptures don't defend them.



Maybe not to you. Lets keep going. Maybe we will get there.

Sorry you are simply extolling your opinion

However Jesus was born under the Law

Being born under the law does not reference being judged by the law

Maybe you should have paid more attention to the teachers commentary

He was “made under the law” (Gal. 4:4). For our sakes He became subject to the demands of the law and kept the law so we could receive His righteousness. Christ placed Himself under the law at the very early beginning of His…
Teacher’s Bible Commentary: Old & New Testament Lessons, Vol. 1–2, Lk 2:22–38; V 2, p 17

Born Under the Law The Son’s Subjection to the Law. Marius Victorinus: Because he is brought forth from a woman he can be said to be made, but made for this temporary purpose: to be subject to the law…
New Testament VIII: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ga 4:4c, p 56

Made under the law] In subjection to it, that in him all its designs might be fulfilled, and by his death the whole might be abolished; the law dying when the Son of God expired upon the cross

Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible with a Commentary and Critical Notes (vol. 6, New Edition.; Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation, 2014), 403.

Made under the law. As one of the human race, partaking of human nature, he was subject to the law of God. As a man he was bound by its requirements, and subject to its control. He took his place under the law that he might accomplish an important purpose for those who were under it. He made himself subject to it that he might become one of them, and secure their redemption

Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: II Corinthians & Galatians (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 361.

 

[TomL]

I figured you'd react this way at some point. I don't mind. You have shown a openness to learning.



So lets work our way out from the events as dipicted in the Scriptures.... while forgetting what you claim is true. Facts are facts. Conclusions from those fact vary from individual to individual. Trust me, I've been having these types of conversations for a long time. I hope surprise me. I welcome it.



Please listen. I said death wasn't an expect happenstance.

Would Adam have died if he stopped eating from the trees in the garden? I know you want me to focus on Christ possibly sinning but give me the courtesy of asking similar questions to the "First Adam".



God wasn't the one that changed. Adam did. Adam made a choice for Eve. Yes. Adam would have never died if he had stayed in the garden. However, that doesn't change the fact that Adam did not have innate Eternal Life. He had no right to Eternal life. Not before he "sinned" nor "after".

God was keeping Adam alive. God continued to keep Adam alive. God was sustaining Adam throughout his life. Life that existed even after you say he "died".

Adam was driven away from the "tree of life". He hadn't ate of the "tree of life" or he would have lived forever.

These are metaphorical representations that have some semblance of a literal application in the fabric of our natural lives. How we discern them flavors our theology.

Look you accused me of being an Arminian - I am not

You claimed or implied I argued for Adam's immortality- I never stated such.

I did state his death was something he would not normally be exposed to had he not broken God's command

Your comment

Yes. Adam would have never died if he had stayed in the garden.

Confirms that

 

[TedT]

You should realize that you're saying Adam sinned because he was a sinner before he was joined to his earthly body. Would you agree?

I absolutely 100% agree with this statement.
As I've said so many times.
As I've quoted the verses I use to support of this pov so many times.

 

[TedT]

My argument is that Adam, without God, would have died.

Yes.
Only sinners are without GOD.
Only sinners earn the wages of sin, ie, death.

 

[TomL]

So when did this happen and where was it recorded?

You should realize that you're saying Adam sinned because he was a sinner before he was joined to his earthly body. Would you agree? Please state you agree or restate what you already said. I'll continuing answering once you do.

Where is the evidence for this PCE?

 

[praise_yeshua]

Some make that mistaken assumption—it is error.

God did not say, "In the day you stop eating the Tree of Life, you will die."

That was not "the thing."

No assumption. Just facts. I didn't that. What verse might that be? Please quote it from your favorite Hebrew translation.

Adam was granted a share in immortality, he did not "possess" it.

You are just conflating properties.

Granted a "share".... What does that mean. Please explain in detail. Like I said. Adam wasn't immortal. He "CONSUMED" things. Which means things died/transformed/ceased to exist.

Think man....

 

[praise_yeshua]

Sorry you are simply extolling your opinion

However Jesus was born under the Law

Sorry. You are simply extolling your opinion. The opinion you were given from the "teachers commentary".

How about not plagiarizing their opinions as if they're your own. Please invite them to debate this here. Don't speak for them.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Maybe you should have paid more attention to the teachers commentary

He was “made under the law” (Gal. 4:4). For our sakes He became subject to the demands of the law and kept the law so we could receive His righteousness. Christ placed Himself under the law at the very early beginning of His…
Teacher’s Bible Commentary: Old & New Testament Lessons, Vol. 1–2, Lk 2:22–38; V 2, p 17

Born Under the Law The Son’s Subjection to the Law. Marius Victorinus: Because he is brought forth from a woman he can be said to be made, but made for this temporary purpose: to be subject to the law…
New Testament VIII: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ga 4:4c, p 56

Made under the law] In subjection to it, that in him all its designs might be fulfilled, and by his death the whole might be abolished; the law dying when the Son of God expired upon the cross

Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible with a Commentary and Critical Notes (vol. 6, New Edition.; Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation, 2014), 403.

Made under the law. As one of the human race, partaking of human nature, he was subject to the law of God. As a man he was bound by its requirements, and subject to its control. He took his place under the law that he might accomplish an important purpose for those who were under it. He made himself subject to it that he might become one of them, and secure their redemption

Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: II Corinthians & Galatians (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 361.

I don't need the "teachers commentary". I have teachers that preached the Scriptures and the Spirit of God. I'll listen to them.

Jesus died right? How could Jesus both need to keep the law and still be judged for it?

It is simple question but has a very profound answer.

You might as well remain in PCE. You're preaching now.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Look you accused me of being an Arminian - I am not

You have been and it is still there. As much as you have changed your still the same. It takes time for you to root out of yourself. You haven't yet.

You claimed or implied I argued for Adam's immortality- I never stated such.

I did state his death was something he would not normally be exposed to had he not broken God's command

Your comment
Confirms that

No it doesn't. God drove Adam away from the Garden. Which didn't happen immediately. So much for swift justice.. devoid of Grace and Mercy.

The law came by Moses. Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ. Moses wasn't enough. Moses got it wrong.

Adam was crafted from "clay". That "clay" couldn't please God. It incapable of pleasing God.

God knows that we are but ashes and dust.

 

[praise_yeshua]

I absolutely 100% agree with this statement.
As I've said so many times.
As I've quoted the verses I use to support of this pov so many times.

I haven't seen it. Please, post it again. Give it to me. If you have already, then please point me to the post. I might have missed it.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Yes.
Only sinners are without GOD.
Only sinners earn the wages of sin, ie, death.

Not true at all. Sinners have God. God sustains sinners.

You're doing really poorly here and you don't even realize it.

Act 17:26 And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;
Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:

Read those verses a dozen times and think....

Do you realize that God planned the boundaries of mankind "habitation" before He ever planted the Garden for Adam.

God sustained Adam. The issue is Eternal Life.

 

[TomL]

You have been and it is still there. As much as you have changed your still the same. It takes time for you to root out of yourself. You haven't yet.

Sorry but there is a difference between Arminianism and provisionism

No it doesn't. God drove Adam away from the Garden. Which didn't happen immediately. So much for swift justice.. devoid of Grace and Mercy.

The law came by Moses. Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ. Moses wasn't enough. Moses got it wrong.

Adam was crafted from "clay". That "clay" couldn't please God. It incapable of pleasing God.

God knows that we are but ashes and dust.

As was noted

You claimed or implied I argued for Adam's immortality- I never stated such.

I did state his death was something he would not normally be exposed to had he not broken God's command

That is a position you affirmed

Please listen. I said death wasn't an expect happenstance.

 

[TomL]

I don't need the "teachers commentary". I have teachers that preached the Scriptures and the Spirit of God. I'll listen to them.

Jesus died right? How could Jesus both need to keep the law and still be judged for it?

It is simple question but has a very profound answer.

You might as well remain in PCE. You're preaching now.

Nonsense

I stated not one thing regarding PCE.

And I in fact deny it.

There you go again with another misrepresentation

BTW there were multiple commentaries quoted contrary to your view, not just the teachers' commentary

He was “made under the law” (Gal. 4:4). For our sakes He became subject to the demands of the law and kept the law so we could receive His righteousness. Christ placed Himself under the law at the very early beginning of His…
Teacher’s Bible Commentary: Old & New Testament Lessons, Vol. 1–2, Lk 2:22–38; V 2, p 17

Born Under the Law The Son’s Subjection to the Law. Marius Victorinus: Because he is brought forth from a woman he can be said to be made, but made for this temporary purpose: to be subject to the law…
New Testament VIII: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Ga 4:4c, p 56

Made under the law] In subjection to it, that in him all its designs might be fulfilled, and by his death the whole might be abolished; the law dying when the Son of God expired upon the cross

Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible with a Commentary and Critical Notes (vol. 6, New Edition.; Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation, 2014), 403.

Made under the law. As one of the human race, partaking of human nature, he was subject to the law of God. As a man he was bound by its requirements, and subject to its control. He took his place under the law that he might accomplish an important purpose for those who were under it. He made himself subject to it that he might become one of them, and secure their redemption

Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: II Corinthians & Galatians (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 361.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Sorry but there is a difference between Arminianism and provisionism

Small difference but Arminianists all disagree at some level. There are difference in Calvinists. There are differences among Catholics and differences among Greek Orthodoxy. Everyone is divided at some level or another. I don't see a meaningful difference between Arminianism and Provisionism. Especially among Baptists.

As was noted

You claimed or implied I argued for Adam's immortality- I never stated such.

Doesn't matter if you explicitly stated it or not. That is what your position requires.

I did state his death was something he would not normally be exposed to had he not broken God's command

That is a position you affirmed

Not in the same manner. We arrive at this part of your conclusion from diverging perspectives entirely. How you build something is as in important as what the ultimate result might be. Your "house" crumbles under intense conditions that challenge your construct.

 

[TomL]

Sorry. You are simply extolling your opinion. The opinion you were given from the "teachers commentary".

How about not plagiarizing their opinions as if they're your own. Please invite them to debate this here. Don't speak for them.

Um it was scripture

Galatians 4:4 (LEB) — 4 But when the fullness of time came, God sent out his Son, born of a woman, born under the law,

Your final statement is simply false witness

I quoted them as they were written giving them credit and did not claim their words as my own

You need to correct your false claim of plagiarizing

 

[praise_yeshua]

Nonsense

I stated not one thing regarding PCE.

Your view can easily coexist with PCE. You're not painting "thin lines" with details that make your "portrait/picture" you're drawing/connecting distinct. I see scribbling. Not real work of a mature artist.

Adam was incapable of pleasing God. Especially when God placed him in a Garden with a "tree" that look really good to taste. Add the fact that God allowed Satan in the Garden to tempt Eve. It was inevitable. The innocent confronted with things they didn't understand. Sure, they disobeyed God but the idea that such actions are worthy of damnation is preposterous. It is literally crazy to preach such nonsense.

Do you plan to live in Eternity with Satan living right along side you to tempt you?

There you go again with another misrepresentation

If you keep responding, I'm going to prove to you that it is not a misrepresentation at all. So keep going. You'll get there.

BTW there were multiple commentaries quoted contrary to your view, not just the teachers' commentary

Wow. Multiple people that agree. I "stand corrected"....

You didn't engage with what I said about it. You simply dismissed it. When you make their argument your own, I'll deal with it.

You don't realize the times I've dealt with exact issue to only have someone claim they didn't believe what they claimed someone else said. I don't do that anymore. It is a waste of time.

Don't post other peoples words to me that are not your own. Make them your own or stop doing it. I can't talk to them to correct them. I'm talking to you.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Um it was scripture

Galatians 4:4 (LEB) — 4 But when the fullness of time came, God sent out his Son, born of a woman, born under the law,

Your final statement is simply false witness

I quoted them as they were written giving them credit and did not claim their words as my own

You need to correct your false claim of plagiarizing

Ah, I'm glad you said that. I need to correct your understanding. Words are copyrighted for a reason. The context of copyright is to protect others from misusing their words for your own argument. Plagiarism includes.... "IDEAS".

I'm not new to this form of debate. Been doing it a long time.

The Son when He was "born of woman" was made under the law of death. He was wrapped in grave clothes from the beginning.

Lets keep going....

 

[jeremiah1five]

That appears unrelated to the questions asked

So if Christ committed adultery he would not have been guilty of sin?

If he took the name of the father in vain he would not have committed sin?

That's correct. In the world since God established His covenant with Abraham and sealed it with circumcision two groups of people came into being. What was once before within Adamites obedient and disobedient, now there is obedient Hebrews and disobedient non-Hebrews (Gentiles.)
If God calls Israel His Bride, then the implication is that the seed of a woman is opposed to the seed of the serpent: Jew and Gentile. Who is symbolized as a woman in Revelation 12? Israel. Thus, any intimacy between a man and a woman not his bride is adultery. God only has one Bride: Israel. And He is faithful to her.

In salvation the believer comes into union with Christ. Two become one (Genesis 2:24; John 17:21.)

There is a reason why God told the children of Israel, "thou shalt have no other gods before thee," and to "not mingle with the "goy" and learn their ways" and that "God is a jealous God."
Jealous of what? Infidelity. "Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid" 1 Cor. 6:15.

True-born Christians can be unfaithful. They are faithful when they love the world which is unfaithfulness to God.

15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
1 John 2:15–16.

God doesn't love the world. Why do you when you give love to another woman which is the unsaved, unsanctified, harlot world. She'll sleep/intercourse with anyone. Mother of harlots. (Rev. 18.)
Remember that.

 

[TomL]

That's correct. In the world since God established His covenant with Abraham and sealed it with circumcision two groups of people came into being. What was once before within Adamites obedient and disobedient, now there is obedient Hebrews and disobedient non-Hebrews (Gentiles.)
If God calls Israel His Bride, then the implication is that the seed of a woman is opposed to the seed of the serpent: Jew and Gentile. Who is symbolized as a woman in Revelation 12? Israel. Thus, any intimacy between a man and a woman not his bride is adultery. God only has one Bride: Israel. And He is faithful to her.

In salvation the believer comes into union with Christ. Two become one (Genesis 2:24; John 17:21.)

There is a reason why God told the children of Israel, "thou shalt have no other gods before thee," and to "not mingle with the "goy" and learn their ways" and that "God is a jealous God."
Jealous of what? Infidelity. "Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid" 1 Cor. 6:15.

True-born Christians can be unfaithful. They are faithful when they love the world which is unfaithfulness to God.

15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
1 John 2:15–16.

God doesn't love the world. Why do you when you give love to another woman which is the unsaved, unsanctified, harlot world. She'll sleep/intercourse with anyone. Mother of harlots. (Rev. 18.)
Remember that.

Really?

John 3:16 (NASB95) — 16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

The world. All mankind. It does not mean any particular part of the world, but man as man—the race that had rebelled and that deserved to die. See Jn. 6:33; 17:21. His love for the world, or for all mankind, in giving his Son, was shown by these circumstances: 1st. All the world was in ruin, and exposed to the wrath of God. 2d. All men were in a hopeless condition. 3d. God gave his Son. Man had no claim on him; it was a gift—an undeserved gift. 4th. He gave him up to extreme sufferings, even the bitter pains of death on the cross. 5th. It was for all the world. He tasted “death for every man,” He. 2:9. He “died for all,” 2 Co. 5:15. “He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world,” 1 Jn. 2:2

Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: Luke & John (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 206–207.