ECT Classical Vs. Biblical Original Sin - Interlude & DIRECT ASSAULT (Part 3) :execute:

[glorydaz]

And... you "accuse" of "hypocrisy"... by what charges?

Danoh projects onto others what he possesses, himself. We see that quite often. Someone recently claimed I'd gotten my feelings, when I hadn't. :dunno:

 

[glorydaz]

Danoh,

So... You deny the connection of the quoted passage with these scriptures?

Matthew 9:13
Hosea 6:6
Mark 2:17
Luke 5:32
1 Tim. 1:15

The beauty of this is the full implications of the impact of Augustine Original Sin. People that believe in their utter helplessness to avoid sin like to say that they do not commit sins of "commission" because they cannot help the sin that they are helpless to commit. This affords people to go before God and essentially claim that they aren't actually "Willful Sinners", but helpless human beings cursed to "sin" by God Himself.

Note that this logic makes God the "Tempter".

The individual that "REJECTS" Augustine Original Sin is led to deeper understanding of GRACE because they go before God in admission that they "Willfully Sin" and are thus "SICK".

How does this impact a believer's walk? The believer extends the Gospel of Grace on a deeper level and has the ability to connect with all people as a "Willful Sinner".

The Augustine Crowd has this enormous story and theology to explain that they are saved by God for the Sin they couldn't help but commit because "God" made them sinners before they were born.

Hmmmmmmmm... This sounds like a deceit and lie crafted to impute wickedness on God and excuse the failures of mankind.

Imagine that.

:e4e:

 

[glorydaz]

13 No one has ascended to heaven but He who came down from heaven, that is, the Son of Man who is in heaven.

There is nothing false about Enoch. It says nothing about going to heaven. Or else the Lord Jesus Christ is a liar.

Yep, even Enoch.

Heb. 11:13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.​

 

[glorydaz]

Because Adam laid his life down in recognition of his "Love" for EVE. He willingly disobeyed! He couldn't defeat Death, but he could embrace "Death" with Eve.

What the first Adam couldn't do, the Last Adam accomplished. 1 Cor. 15:21KJV

 

[Nick M]

The one in the white shirt has said everything in that video on TOL. Accept my one snarky comment about big words.

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Thank you I was distracted when I posted the sin nature comes through Adam and Jesus had an earthly mother NOT an earthly Father, and there was a reason for that.

I know you revere the very WORD of God and HIS Scripture, thus I was certain this was the case.

There was a reason Jesus had no earthly father.

God Fathered God. This is the very "reason". The Sin that is "passed" down idea is Augustine and not scriptural. God made us equal to Him as His "children" of "His Body", but the Patriarchal tradition in scripture is specifically to show us our "Not Like God" place and equality existing only through Love likened to intimacy that is beyond the consummation of a marriage.

I cannot emphasize how Calvinist and Augustine the idea is that we are imputed with "Adam's" sin or "sin nature". We make mistakes... God doesn't. That's the actual truth of the matter. We are not and never will be "like God".

Even though man is born with a sin nature there is still no real excuse ! Scripture says every man is drawn away through his "own" lust and when lust conceives it produces sin and sin produces death.....Where id man's lust come from I would argue it comes from his sinful nature.

In other words... the extra biblical concept of imputed sin and "sin nature, can go out the window and all is well in Jesus land. You see it... I can tell you see it.

Jesus was truly man without a sin nature just as Adam was showing that Adam chose to disobey God He did NOT have to sin.

If He was tempted in every manner we were tempted in scripture... this is misleading. What if I say...

Our 5 Star General gave each of us a shot to recognize that He deserved His supreme Authority, or challenge it and from the first Angel to the Last Human... none have "measured up". Would that be "fair" to say? Same rules... same playing field... Only ONE could Draw "Excalibur".

That is making an excuse to sin. Adam disobeyed God period.

So admitting that I have free will and screw up is making an "excuse for sin", while saying God "imputed" a Sin nature through Adam or I "inherited" a "sin nature" from Adam and can't help but sin isn't?

Did you ever tell your Drill instructor that you couldn't make your bunk properly because your Great-Great Grand Father couldn't make his bunk properly, thus you have a propensity to screw up your bunk?

How would that have gone?

Yes, I have read and prayed over the analogy of the bronze serpent many times.
Bottom line of the analogy is look to Jesus for forgiveness as they looked to the bronze serpent to be healed we look to Jesus and only Jesus to be saved from the sting and poison of sin.

Aha! AMEN.... :thumb: Fully Agree! Only One "Bright" ... and TRUE... "NORTH". We can either pull our compass and map out and measure the Klicks out for ourselves, or we can accept that "He" alone made it through this "Jungle" for us.

I dealt with all of that at the foot of the cross in 1978.

Amen and Praise Jesus! Hoo Yah! Well... ya know I shouldn't be saying Hoo Rah... but... didn't we both have the same insignia's on our pay-stubs?

Why was Jesus born without an earthly Father ? Surely there was a reason !

Only God can Father God. We addressed this earlier.

That death thingy came from Adam how do you explain that death is a result of sin. Even though babies die never having sinned ?

Aha... Now you speak of "Physical" death. Is this not the result of us being "Like God", thanks to the old Dragon's excellent (severe sarcasm) suggestion. He's that one guy in the ranks that screws it up for everyone! The old Dragon is essentially Full Metal Jacket's Pyle, eating a jelly donut while we all suffer!

offered the forbidden fruit to Adam and he ate HE DID NOT HAVE TO. You are placing the blame on Satan when it was Adam who DISOBEYED God.

I believe that Adam didn't want to live without Eve and took on her "Sin" in a literal fashion, while a very SUPER DUPER SQUARED AWAY SOLDIER ... Aced the coarse and then imputed HIS SUCCESS in place of "EVERYONE" else's Failures and sniped the Alpha TARGET in the progress (Heb. 2:14). Do I get points for literary creativity yet and does not the Groom "Lay" his life down for the "Bride"... per scripture, while the instigator of the conflict is FOOBARed and DOA?

Satan tempted Eve she chose to disobey God she did NOT have to. Eve gave the forbidden fruit to Adam and he chose to sin. Satan tempted Eve and Adam disobeyed.

Eve was "seduced" into feeling "lacking". Again... Did Adam think "Eve" was "lacking"? I'm fairly certain the whole cloths thing upset him in the long run. Just saying... Does not scripture say this.... (1 Peter 3:7)? Does it not also say this... (Eph. 5:25)? Do you really want to take the (1 John 4:8) and the (1 Cor. 13) out of the matter?

Can you think of a more God defining Statement than God is Love that makes the (John 5:39) of the matter even more clear in the Creation account? Christology... Christology... Christology!

We sin because that is our nature to sin but we are responsible because of our nature that is what we chose to do.

That's odd... because as long as I have known better, I do it because I willingly screw up and then reap the consequences which usually suck! As in... sin... in and of itself is an empty pursuit, but we aren't GOD and Sin is actually "Missing the Mark", so in reality... we were born different from God and always will be, because God never desired to "Marry" a "Clone" of "Himself". Does that make sense?

We agree Jesus is the only propitiation there is no other.

Well Amen to that! This is imperative and binds us as brethren in Him with the afforded enjoyment of discussing differing theological perspectives.

Like the experience of Adam disobeying God and with that experience would have been trapped in living in sin had God not covered him with animal skins.

I could push this point to say that God covered up the most beautiful things He had ever formed and was disgusted that Satan caused Adam and Eve to be ASHAMED of HIS Workmanship...

But... I mainly want to point out that you are looking at the "Flesh" of Adam and Eve and not their "Hearts". We can do this as we have All Scripture and on top of it... (1 Cor. 2:16, 1 John 4:8 and 1 Cor. 13)... but that's just me. Is the disobedience the "important" part? Or is the message of Love the important part?

Little children, I shall be with you a little while longer. You will seek Me; and as I said to the Jews, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come,’ so now I say to you. 34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”​

Again why do you suppose Jesus had no earthly Father there was a reason otherwise God what purpose did that serve ?

Again... Only God can Beget God. As for the "Flesh" of the matter... God is no cheater. I genuinely believe that He walked as a 100 percent Man, just like scripture says, because He alone can "Walk" Righteously and Good without screwing up. If any other being was "Perfect like God"... they would "Be God". And alas... since that whole "Be like God" ego trip of the Dragon didn't work out so well, I'm fairly certain the fate of anyone else who tries it will end up similar.

He alone is Holy and righteous.

Amen Dodge! Amen!

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

The one in the white shirt has said everything in that video on TOL. Accept my one snarky comment about big words.

That's hilarious... Have you "purged those books from your library yet?".

Has Paul's use of the word ALL changed any differently than John 3:16's use of the word WhoSoEver?

Could you use smaller words please... my small, feeble, 66 book only mind is struggling to understand why you embrace the foundational doctrine of Augustine original sin and are now redefining the word "ALL".

Oh dear Goodness no!

Is Nick M turning Calvinist on us?

Wait... rotfl.... John 3:16 says "JewSoEver"... right?

Wait... tears in my eyes with laughter.... two big words for you...

"Scriptural Supremacy"

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

What the first Adam couldn't do, the Last Adam accomplished. 1 Cor. 15:21KJV

Amen!!!!!! Thank you!!!! Exactly!!!! What you said!

:Thumb:

 

[Shasta]

And 1 John, as well as the rest of the writings to the circumcision are not for us. They are all useful for study, as all scripture is. But not our doctrine. Especially Hebrews.

Where do you get the idea that 1 John was for the circumcision. It is not addressed to Jews nor does the subject matter deal with matters such as circumcision, legalism and eating kosher. Instead it deals with proto-Gnosticism which was a mixture of Eastern mysticism and neo-Platonic philosophy with Christianity. This was not a specifically Jewish belief system. The time is wrong too. 1 John was not written until the last decade of the First Century, in Ephesus, a time when the Church was thoroughly integrated.

 

[Shasta]

Yeah, little children are without guile, until they learn what guile is when it is practiced on them.
They are trusting, until they learn people can't be trusted.

Matt. 18:7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!​

We are told to emulate children in some respects but not in others. On the plus side we are told to receive and enter the kingdom with childlike faith and humility (Matthew 18:3-4)

On the other hand, here are some traits of children we are told NOT to emulate.

1. We are not to have a simplistic level of understanding
(Luke 22:26, 1 Corinthians 3:1)

2. We are not to get into foolish conflicts with others (like children do at home and at school)
(Luke 7:32)

3. We are not to be uncritically gullible, impulsive or unstable like children (Ephesians 4:14)

4. We are not to speak, think and reason as children. Instead we are supposed to lay aside childish habits, and attitudes (1 Corinthians 13:11).

Neither the scripture nor experience supports the idea that children can be left to govern themselves and that they will naturally do the right thing because they are directed from within by the Holy Spirit. Rather, they must be disciplined from the outside by their parents and other authorities so they will learn to do what is right and avoid what is wrong (Proverbs 22: 6,15, Galatians 3:24).

If children were spiritual they would be led by the Spirit. This is the hallmark of the "sons of God" (Romans 8:14). If children were guided this way they would not need the discipline of their parents. Jesus was born of the Spirit and sinless. Because of this I do not think Joseph ever had to use the rod to Him to make him obey.

 

[glorydaz]

Again... Only God can Beget God. As for the "Flesh" of the matter... God is no cheater. I genuinely believe that He walked as a 100 percent Man, just like scripture says, because He alone can "Walk" Righteously and Good without screwing up. If any other being was "Perfect like God"... they would "Be God". And alas... since that whole "Be like God" ego trip of the Dragon didn't work out so well, I'm fairly certain the fate of anyone else who tries it will end up similar.

Yep, Jesus was 100% God and 100% man. He certainly knew satan, though, and He did come to die.

 

[Nick M]

Amen!!!!!! Thank you!!!! Exactly!!!! What you said!

:Thumb:

I said that and you denied it. You then started in about feminism and what Adam's real sin was. So I am still trying to figure out your position and points.

 

[Nick M]

Where do you get the idea that 1 John was for the circumcision.

Do you accept the Bible books as arranged by "early church fathers"? I will explain it, I just need to know a few things from you first. Or do you think the books are out of order, and not necessarily divine inspiration.

 

[Nang]

I said that and you denied it. You then started in about feminism and what Adam's real sin was. So I am still trying to figure out your position and points.

. . so is he . .

 

[Nang]

EE's Christology is not exactly accurate . . .

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

I said that and you denied it. You then started in about feminism and what Adam's real sin was. So I am still trying to figure out your position and points.

Hi Nick...

If you could explain your use of the word feminist... no wait... how about we overlook your ignorant comment and move on.

You must have issues reading everything people write or following threads, because your implications are indeed tied to "Augustine" doctrine... and to top matters off you are now telling people what parts of scripture are valid.

That's just lame. I'm trying seriously hard to not let you fully have it...

Remember when I messed up and misunderstood what was going on in your John thread and I apologized, then edited out my posts of misunderstanding? Well you're now whining and kicking, while totally uninformed to the context of this discussion that spans 3 threads. They all link via the OP's.

If you would kindly avoid being irritating and limited in your scope of discussion... that would be great.

Limited patience for you as of now,

- EE

 

[glorydaz]

We are told to emulate children in some respects but not in others. On the plus side we are told to receive and enter the kingdom with childlike faith and humility (Matthew 18:3-4)

On the other hand, here are some traits of children we are told NOT to emulate.

1. We are not to have a simplistic level of understanding
(Luke 22:26, 1 Corinthians 3:1)

2. We are not to get into foolish conflicts with others (like children do at home and at school)
(Luke 7:32)

3. We are not to be uncritically gullible, impulsive or unstable like children (Ephesians 4:14)

4. We are not to speak, think and reason as children. Instead we are supposed to lay aside childish habits, and attitudes (1 Corinthians 13:11).

Neither the scripture nor experience supports the idea that children can be left to govern themselves and that they will naturally do the right thing because they are directed from within by the Holy Spirit. Rather, they must be disciplined from the outside by their parents and other authorities so they will learn to do what is right and avoid what is wrong (Proverbs 22: 6,15, Galatians 3:24).

If children were spiritual they would be led by the Spirit. This is the hallmark of the "sons of God" (Romans 8:14). If children were guided this way they would not need the discipline of their parents. Jesus was born of the Spirit and sinless. Because of this I do not think Joseph ever had to use the rod to Him to make him obey.

My goodness. Clearly, the Lord didn't expect us to start pooping our pants. He created us, and He understands that human beings need some time to grow up. If you want to compare them to adults then you should actually think about what Christ was saying. You will often see the same things in brand new Christians. They are still living in awe of everything. They aren't out to impress anyone...they are humble saying exactly what they mean...they are learners and listeners. They have perfect faith believing everything is possible.


You seem to be digging pretty deep to bring up things Jesus did not mean. The verse from Luke 7, for instance, isn't saying children are in "conflict" when they play games, He's saying these grown men sounded like kids playing a games though they were serious. Children playing games is not bad. :nono:

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

EE's Christology is not exactly accurate . . .

Oic... forgive me while I fail to apologize for separating Jesus from Satan. Have fun with your commentaries and embracing Augustine doctrine that makes God out to be spiteful and focuses on the Flesh of matters via a couple proof texts that are utterly ripped out of context.

If you want to remove the Love from God, please do so and even do it here with scripture... but next time you address my "Christology... remember this... You depend on election. Israel had that... and you say God "Replaced" Israel... so... maybe he'll replace ours?!?

Just sayen... Remember how much of Genesis you were confused about in the coarse of discussion through the OP series? If your "Christology" has you making theological errors within the first 3 books of the Bible... wouldn't that be a sign you might want to go straight to scripture and (1 John 2:27) so you can scrap the Augustine "Training Wheels"?

:carryon:

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

. . so is he . .

Oh My... someone now has an "axe" to grind. If you only realized the actual effects of your baseless "accusations"... you would take a "different" approach.

 

[Nang]

Oic... forgive me while I fail to apologize for separating Jesus from Satan.

Such is not Christology. Do you even know what Christology, is?

but next time you address my "Cheistology...

:chuckle:

remember this... You depend on election. Israel had that... and you say God "Replaced" Israel... so... maybe he'll replace ours?!?

Yep, Nick is right . . you bounce all over the map and never land.

Just sayen... Remember how much of Genesis you were confused about

Nope. I am not confused about Genesis at all.

What confuses me the most, is why Lon and AMR ever allowed themselves to be identified with you, a heretic.