I wonder what kind of death is being referred to here?:
Genesis-Revelation.
"We see in...Let's look at...It is evident in..." Genesis-Revelation that I am right.
Fun! "Thanks!"
You bore us.
EOT. RIP. CLOSED. DOA.
Calvinism: Imputed Death?
- Thread starter Jerry Shugart
- Start date
Genesis-Revelation.
"We see in...Let's look at...It is evident in..." Genesis-Revelation that I am right.
Fun! "Thanks!"
You bore us.
EOT. RIP. CLOSED. DOA.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Please consider what is said in this verse:
"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" (Ro.5:12).
I believe that the death here in "bold" is speaking about spiritual death. And since a man "dies" spiritually when he sins then that means that he was "alive" spiritually before he sinned. After all, a man cannot die spiritually unless he is first alive spiritually.
Therefore, that means that a man is not dead spiritually when he emerges from the womb.
We can see the same truth here:
"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).
Nang
TOL Subscriber
The Westminster Confession of Faith is compiled of a summary of the Holy Scriptures, according to the Christian beliefs of the early and faithful church fathers.
Anyone who attempts to elevate himself above and teach in opposition to these confessions, cannot be respected as speaking for Jesus Christ and His NT Church.
Spiritual death is as real as physical death; physical death being the clear and undeniable manifestation of both. Neither can be denied; empiracticly nor scripturally.
So this OP is just plain false, for it is a denial of "Original Sin."
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
My final authority is the Scriptures and not what some men teach about the Scriptures.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
If that were so, you would know that only sin and righteousness are legal imputations (charges) from God . . .
Not death.
Imputations are legal renderings of either guilt or innocence.
Death is a sentence imposed according to one of the above charges.
It does no good to say you depend upon Holy Scripture alone, if you do not bother to learn what, or believe in, all it actually reveals regarding the Law and Will of God.
That settles it.
Thanks for saying nothing, and checking in.
Next up: The truth, is the truth....
Nang
TOL Subscriber
There is something much less than a loser, and you are it . . .
Dispensational writings is compiled of a summary of the Holy Scriptures, according to the Christian beliefs of the early and faithful church fathers.
Anyone who attempts to elevate himself above and teach in opposition to these confessions/writings, cannot be respected as speaking for Jesus Christ and His NT Church.
See how that works, you bah loser?
It does no good to say you depend upon Holy Scripture alone, if you do not bother to learn what, or believe in, all it actually reveals regarding the Law and Will of God.
Fun! You taught us that debate ender, Endora-we learned that from you.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
"They (Adam & Eve) being the root of mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by original generation" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI/3).
What do you think that the word "conveyed" means? How is that different from the word "imputed"?
Besides that, the Calvinists teach that "the guilt" of Adam's sin is imputed to mankind. If the Calvinist are right then the sin of Adam was imputed to his sons, Cain and Abel. However, what is said here contradicts that idea:
"The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son" (Ezek.18:20).
What is said here declares in no uncertain terms that children do not bear the guilt of the sins of their father.
Last edited:
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Dispensationalists have never developed a formal confession of faith, for they cannot agree amongst themselves or be bothered to come to consensus with their numerous and various beliefs. (TOL is a prime example of their bickerings and failure of their many factions, to agree with each other!)
Reformers have held to strong, biblical agreement in the faith of Jesus Christ, for 500 years, through the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Three Forms of Unity (the Canons of Dordt, the Heidelberg Confession, and the Belgic Confession).
Anyone, desiring to call themselves "Christian," will refer to these products of the early NT church fathers for edification and assurance of sound, scriptural beliefs.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I asked you what is the difference between "conveyed" and "imputed":
"They (Adam & Eve) being the root of mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by original generation" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI/3).
Nang
TOL Subscriber
What is the difference between imputed ("attributed") and sentenced?
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Do you always answer a question with a question? If you do not have an answer to my question just say so.
Again, what is the difference between "conveyed" and "imputed":
"They (Adam & Eve) being the root of mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by original generation" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI/3).
Besides that, the Calvinists teach that "the guilt" of Adam's sin is imputed to mankind. If the Calvinist are right then the sin of Adam was imputed to his sons, Cain and Abel. However, what is said here contradicts that idea:
"The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son" (Ezek.18:20).
What is said here declares in no uncertain terms that the sons do not bear the guilt of the sins of their father.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Must have picked it up from you . . . :angel:
Look the words up for yourself . . The definitions are quite different.
Yep. Sin was imputed (charged) and the resultant corruption of nature was a universal sentence of death imposed upon all mankind.
No, it simply means all men are justly charged with their own sins; proving the sentence of universal death is just, because all men die.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Original Sin: Better To Dig Deeper Before Placing Yourself Outside the Camp
Original Sin: Better To Dig Deeper Before Placing Yourself Outside the Camp
I assume you know the portion of the WCF you quoted is accompanied by Scripture citations:
And plenty of commentary is available so you can actually dig deeper rather than being superficial:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/shaw/shaw_06.html
Up until the fifth century the doctrine of original sin was universally received by the Church. It was never a matter of debate. That is until a man came along and complained: Pelagius, who was later joined by the anti-Trinitarian Socinius. So you are in some very sad company, Jerry. Yet, given your not a few odd views, I am not that surprised. :AMR:
Underlying each and every complaint about Calvinism lies the root error of denying the impacts of the sin of Adam as taught in Scripture (Jer. 17:9; Mark 7:21-23; Eph. 2:2; Eph. 2:4-5; Titus 3:5; John 3:19; Rom. 3:10-12; 5:6; 6:16-20; Eph. 2:1,3;1 Cor. 2:14). After all such denial is part and parcel Pelagianism.
Jerry, if you had a better grasp of church history, you would know that your quibble is not with Calvinists. It is with Scripture and the church militant:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...cs-of-Reformed-Theology&p=4559007#post4559007
By the way, the word "convey" in that section of the WCF relates to the guilt of sin being imputed and how the corrupted sin nature of Adam is passed along to all his progeny. There are two leading views: traducianism or creationism. The "ordinary generation" phrase neccessarily excludes the birth of Our Lord, as His was not a birth from the ordinary means (sexual relations between a man and a woman).
Below are listed some of the men who held to one or the other views:
Creationism:
John Calvin
Francis Turretin
Charles Hodge
A.A. Hodge
Louis Berkhof
Augustine (according to Berkhof, he hesitated to choose)
Traducianism:
Tertullian
Martin Luther
Jonathan Edwards
Ezekiel Hopkins
W.G.T. Shedd
Augustus Strong
Gordon H. Clark
These two views relate to how Adam's corrupt nature is passed along. There are complex arguments behind both views which I will leave to one's own research and study.
AMR
Original Sin: Better To Dig Deeper Before Placing Yourself Outside the Camp
I assume you know the portion of the WCF you quoted is accompanied by Scripture citations:
They being the root of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed; (Gen. 1:27-28, Gen. 2:16-17, Acts 17:26, Rom. 5:12, 15-19, 1 Cor. 15:21-22, 45, 49) and the same death in sin, and corrupted nature, conveyed to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. (Ps. 51:5, Gen. 5:3,Job 14:4, Job 15:14)
And plenty of commentary is available so you can actually dig deeper rather than being superficial:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/shaw/shaw_06.html
Up until the fifth century the doctrine of original sin was universally received by the Church. It was never a matter of debate. That is until a man came along and complained: Pelagius, who was later joined by the anti-Trinitarian Socinius. So you are in some very sad company, Jerry. Yet, given your not a few odd views, I am not that surprised. :AMR:
Underlying each and every complaint about Calvinism lies the root error of denying the impacts of the sin of Adam as taught in Scripture (Jer. 17:9; Mark 7:21-23; Eph. 2:2; Eph. 2:4-5; Titus 3:5; John 3:19; Rom. 3:10-12; 5:6; 6:16-20; Eph. 2:1,3;1 Cor. 2:14). After all such denial is part and parcel Pelagianism.
Jerry, if you had a better grasp of church history, you would know that your quibble is not with Calvinists. It is with Scripture and the church militant:
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...cs-of-Reformed-Theology&p=4559007#post4559007
By the way, the word "convey" in that section of the WCF relates to the guilt of sin being imputed and how the corrupted sin nature of Adam is passed along to all his progeny. There are two leading views: traducianism or creationism. The "ordinary generation" phrase neccessarily excludes the birth of Our Lord, as His was not a birth from the ordinary means (sexual relations between a man and a woman).
Below are listed some of the men who held to one or the other views:
Creationism:
John Calvin
Francis Turretin
Charles Hodge
A.A. Hodge
Louis Berkhof
Augustine (according to Berkhof, he hesitated to choose)
Traducianism:
Tertullian
Martin Luther
Jonathan Edwards
Ezekiel Hopkins
W.G.T. Shedd
Augustus Strong
Gordon H. Clark
These two views relate to how Adam's corrupt nature is passed along. There are complex arguments behind both views which I will leave to one's own research and study.
AMR
Last edited:
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
That is not what the verse says:
"The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son" (Ezek.18:20).
What is being said is that the person who sins is the one who will die because the "guilt" of the father will not be counted against him. Let us look at what the Calvinists say about that:
"They (Adam & Eve) being the root of mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by original generation" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI/3).
If this is correct then the guilt of Adam's sin was imputed to both of his sons. So both the sons shared the guilt of Adam. But that is impossible because of what is said here:
"The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son" (Ezek.18:20).
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I noticed that you did not even attempt to answer what I said in my OP!
Why is that?
Tell me what kind of "death" do you think is spoken of in this verse:
"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).
Thanks!
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Jerry Hoists Himself Upon His Own Petard
Jerry Hoists Himself Upon His Own Petard
The scant minutes that past between my post and your sarcasm above leads me to notice you did not bother to digest what I posted in detail. You just pressed on as usual.
As I remarked, being superficial is not something that fosters real discussion. It usually results in all the usual rabbit trails you tee up to detract from the obvious fact that you do not want to actually learn something other than what you think you already know.
In James 1:13-18, James teaches us that while God tests His people, He never tempts them to sin. That is the overall context and you need to keep this in mind rather that your usual cherry-picking of verses in hopes of making your ill-formed points.
In James 1:14, he now attributes temptation to each person's evil desire. James places the responsibility for temptation and sin squarely on the shoulders of each human being.
In James 1:15, he describes the havoc that desire can wreak in the spiritual life. James metaphorically pictures desire as conceiving and giving birth to sin. And sin, once in existence, if it becomes full-grown, produces death. James implies that temptation, in and of itself, is not sinful. Only when desire "conceives"—is allowed to produce offspring—does sin come into being. Here the metaphor James is using reaches its final stage stage: a person is enticed by lust, lust then gives birth to sin, which in turn gives birth to death.
Such is a fine description of the first sin of Adam in the Garden and that of all sin. But, given that Adam was our federal representative, and when he first sinned (the original sin, not all his other sins), we all sinned in Adam, just as if we were really there with him and sinning along with him. By one man, death came to all men.
Your appeal to this passage does not make your arguments for denial of the effects of Adam's original sin. It makes mine and the church's.
AMR
Jerry Hoists Himself Upon His Own Petard
The scant minutes that past between my post and your sarcasm above leads me to notice you did not bother to digest what I posted in detail. You just pressed on as usual.
As I remarked, being superficial is not something that fosters real discussion. It usually results in all the usual rabbit trails you tee up to detract from the obvious fact that you do not want to actually learn something other than what you think you already know.
In James 1:13-18, James teaches us that while God tests His people, He never tempts them to sin. That is the overall context and you need to keep this in mind rather that your usual cherry-picking of verses in hopes of making your ill-formed points.
In James 1:14, he now attributes temptation to each person's evil desire. James places the responsibility for temptation and sin squarely on the shoulders of each human being.
In James 1:15, he describes the havoc that desire can wreak in the spiritual life. James metaphorically pictures desire as conceiving and giving birth to sin. And sin, once in existence, if it becomes full-grown, produces death. James implies that temptation, in and of itself, is not sinful. Only when desire "conceives"—is allowed to produce offspring—does sin come into being. Here the metaphor James is using reaches its final stage stage: a person is enticed by lust, lust then gives birth to sin, which in turn gives birth to death.
Such is a fine description of the first sin of Adam in the Garden and that of all sin. But, given that Adam was our federal representative, and when he first sinned (the original sin, not all his other sins), we all sinned in Adam, just as if we were really there with him and sinning along with him. By one man, death came to all men.
Your appeal to this passage does not make your arguments for denial of the effects of Adam's original sin. It makes mine and the church's.
AMR