The Twin Doctrine That Brings No Hope of Salvation

[Truster]

Preachers of the doctrine "people are born in sin", both Arminians and Calvinists, also teach that unless people first believe, they could not be in Christ. What is amazing is these preachers seem to NOT realize that their twin doctrine brings about an impossibility for people to be in Christ.

1. If people are "born in sin", then they are born NOT in Christ.
2. If people are "born NOT in Christ", then they cannot bear fruit because only those in Christ can bear fruit.
3. If people cannot bear fruit, then they cannot have faith because faith is fruit of the Spirit.
4. If people cannot have faith, then they cannot believe because faith is needed so that one can believe.
5. If people cannot believe, then, as per the twin doctrine, people cannot be in Christ.

Therefore, the twin doctrine "people are born in sin" and "unless people first believe they could not be in Christ" brings no hope of salvation.

Both Arminians and Calvinists have a lot of explaining to do.

An unrepentant sinner has no hope nor want of salvation.

Lazarus was not in the tomb longing for life. Man does have a propensity towards religion but that is not salvation, it's the delusion.

"There is a way that seems right to man that leads to death".​

 

[nikolai_42]

Preachers of the doctrine "people are born in sin", both Arminians and Calvinists, also teach that unless people first believe, they could not be in Christ. What is amazing is these preachers seem to NOT realize that their twin doctrine brings about an impossibility for people to be in Christ.

1. If people are "born in sin", then they are born NOT in Christ.
2. If people are "born NOT in Christ", then they cannot bear fruit because only those in Christ can bear fruit.
3. If people cannot bear fruit, then they cannot have faith because faith is fruit of the Spirit.
4. If people cannot have faith, then they cannot believe because faith is needed so that one can believe.
5. If people cannot believe, then, as per the twin doctrine, people cannot be in Christ.

Therefore, the twin doctrine "people are born in sin" and "unless people first believe they could not be in Christ" brings no hope of salvation.

Both Arminians and Calvinists have a lot of explaining to do.

To whom is this passage referring :

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13

If I understand your position correctly, you are forced to say it applies to everyone since John 1:13 is describing the new birth. But that verse alone implies that there are only some that are born of God. And in the context of verse 12, that number is then limited to those who "received him" and "believe{ed} on his name". It directly links being born again to that saving faith and makes one a corollary to the other. In other words, those who are born again are born of God - but that number is limited to those that receive Him and believe on His name.

 

[Samie]

To whom is this passage referring :

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
John 1:12-13

If I understand your position correctly, you are forced to say it applies to everyone since John 1:13 is describing the new birth. But that verse alone implies that there are only some that are born of God. And in the context of verse 12, that number is then limited to those who "received him" and "believe{ed} on his name". It directly links being born again to that saving faith and makes one a corollary to the other. In other words, those who are born again are born of God - but that number is limited to those that receive Him and believe on His name.

Receiving and believing are acts doable only by those ALREADY plugged in to the ONLY Source of Power - Christ, the power of God (1 Cor 1:24). IOW, they are already in Christ PRIOR to their "believing and receiving", OTHERWISE, being powerless, they could not have received nor believed.

 

[nikolai_42]

Receiving and believing are acts doable only by those ALREADY plugged in to the ONLY Source of Power - Christ, the power of God (1 Cor 1:24). IOW, they are already in Christ PRIOR to their "believing and receiving", OTHERWISE, being powerless, they could not have received nor believed.

But you have said everyone is born again by virtue of Christ's resurrection. This passage limits the number of those who are born again to those who receive Christ and believe on His name.

 

[Samie]

But you have said everyone is born again by virtue of Christ's resurrection. This passage limits the number of those who are born again to those who receive Christ and believe on His name.

How so? Is there any limit to God's grace? see Titus 2:11

 

[nikolai_42]

How so? Is there any limit to God's grace? see Titus 2:11

The point is, there is a requirement there for being born again. Being born again requires receiving of Christ and believing on His name. As John 3 tells us, those who don't are already condemned. And that was before the resurrection - so it is saying that there are those that didn't believe on Him - which is a limitation of John 1:12-13 in the same chapter that has Jesus talking about the necessity of being born again. And (again) since being born again is directly linked to faith and receiving Christ, it can't be that everyone actually is born again (otherwise none would be condemned already).

 

[Samie]

The point is, there is a requirement there for being born again. Being born again requires receiving of Christ and believing on His name. As John 3 tells us, those who don't are already condemned. And that was before the resurrection - so it is saying that there are those that didn't believe on Him - which is a limitation of John 1:12-13 in the same chapter that has Jesus talking about the necessity of being born again. And (again) since being born again is directly linked to faith and receiving Christ, it can't be that everyone actually is born again (otherwise none would be condemned already).

There is ONLY one requirement for one to be born again through the resurrection of Christ: He must have died with Christ FIRST. As Paul said,

NAS Gal 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me.

 

[nikolai_42]

There is ONLY one requirement for one to be born again through the resurrection of Christ: He must have died with Christ FIRST. As Paul said,

NAS Gal 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me.

But that scripture doesn't say what you are saying, it only speaks to Paul's experience of the new birth - having been crucified with Christ. Nowhere does it say (or even hint) all are crucified with Christ. Nowhere does it say (or even hint) that all are born again (that Christ lives in everyone). But John 1:12-13 and John 3 speak directly to the requirements. And if you go back a little in the same passage to the Galatians that you quoted from, Paul says this :

Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 2:16

Which is a picture of those who believe (in John 3:16) while the (implied) "they" that contrasts the "we" of this verse ("they" being those who seek to be justified by the Law...justifying themselves by their works) is a picture of those who don't believe in Christ (John 3:18), who don't believe on His name (neg. of John 1:12-13).

 

[Samie]

But that scripture doesn't say what you are saying, it only speaks to Paul's experience of the new birth - having been crucified with Christ. Nowhere does it say (or even hint) all are crucified with Christ.

We ALL died when Christ died:

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 14 For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died; 15 and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

 

[nikolai_42]

We ALL died when Christ died:

2 Corinthians 5:14-15 14 For the love of Christ compels us, because we judge thus: that if One died for all, then all died; 15 and He died for all, that those who live should live no longer for themselves, but for Him who died for them and rose again.

Two points here :

1. The "all" here must necessarily be all those for whom Christ died. Therefore, if Christ died for every last man that ever lived, then every last man lives in Him. With that assessment, no one will disagree (I don't believe). But the "all" there seems to be limited by the fact that Paul has to specify "those who live" in verse 15 and "if any man be in Christ" in verse 17. The "if" wouldn't be there (I don't believe) if there was any limitation as to who is in Christ by virtue of His death. But the fact that it is there makes the whole passage read as though the "all" here is speaking only of believers. Therefore, only believers are in Christ.

2. The second point goes to a different reading of the verse. You used the NKJV and I use the KJV. The KJV says this :

For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead:
And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.
2 Corinthians 5:14-15

Now, I don't know Greek. So I can't really assess it from the original language (maybe someone can interject here?) but in English, the two renditions read differently (even if only subtly) - especially if you have the view that you do. When the text says "then were all dead", it is reaching a conclusion of what was already true - in other words, it is saying that if Christ died for all, then it has to be that all were already in a state of death. Not that all died in Christ - but that all mankind is already dead (in trespasses and sin). And I do realize that that makes the reading of "all" more universal (if something can, indeed, be "more universal"). So it is possible that all those for whom Christ died were dead in trespasses and sin (even those for whom, in the limited atonement view, He didn't die). But I concede it is possible (only grammatically) that here the "all" literally means every last human that ever lived. But then we run into the limiting "if" from point 1.

Bottom line, the way I have always read that is that all were dead in trespasses and sin - all those for whom Christ died - because (in part) the next verse implies strongly that not all live in Him.

 

[Samie]

Two points here :

1. The "all" here must necessarily be all those for whom Christ died.

He died for all: for every man:

KJV Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

 

[nikolai_42]

He died for all: for every man:

KJV Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

But your quote still does not connect Christ's death (even if I accepted that absolutely everyone without exception is born again because of His death and resurrection) inextricably to those who live in Christ. In other words, even if everyone actually is born again (or, rather born born again) you have not shown that Christ's death for everone who ever lived results in everyone living. Neither 2 Cor 5:14-15 nor Hebrews 2:9 makes the connection. They only assert Christ's death for every man. Not that every man (as a direct and inevitable result) lives in Christ. In other words, you haven't shown that Christ's death automatically results in everyone being born again. Just that (potentially) every last man who ever lived is covered by Christ's death.

Paul says this to the Romans :

For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
Romans 5:10

If you assert all are dead because Christ died, then because Christ lives, all are saved. You may not have a problem with that - may be a universalist - but he also told the Corinthians this :

Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
2 Corinthians 5:20

If - as you believe - all are covered automatically by Christ's death, then by Romans 5:10 all are reconciled to God by that same death. However, if Paul is imploring the Corinthians to be reconciled to God, then it follows that that reconciliation is not automatic and so the death of Christ does NOT automatically apply to every man. Or if you still believe it does, then you believe only part of His death applies to all men everywhere - born again but NOT reconciled?

 

[Samie]

Rom 5:10 tells us EXPLICITLY that we are reconciled to God by the death of Christ. To be told "be ye reconciled to God" simply means, for me, to live the life of one already reconciled.

 

[nikolai_42]

Rom 5:10 tells us EXPLICITLY that we are reconciled to God by the death of Christ. To be told "be ye reconciled to God" simply means, for me, to live the life of one already reconciled.

But the "we" of Romans 5:10 is speaking of the enemies of God that are reconciled to Him. Reconciliation - by this verse - makes friends of His enemies. The plain reading of 2 Cor 5:20 uses words that speak clearly about imploring, pleading, asking ("beseech", "we pray you") etc... Paul says they (the apostles, I suppose) were made ambassadors to bring the word of reconciliation ("ministry of reconciliation" per verse 18). That Paul's message was not "do what you are supposed to" should be clear from his treatment of the law. His ministry is not spent telling people and churches "do this" but rather tearing down edifices of ignorance, deception and outright denial of the truth.

And if reconciliation makes friends of God's enemies, He should not have any more enemies. If we are reconciled - by definition - we are not any longer the enemy of God. Therefore, when we read of those that are His enemies (e.g. Philippians 3:18), what are we to do with them? Paul specifically tells the Colossians that they were enemies of God in their minds (Col 1:21) by wicked works. But Christ has reconciled them :

And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled
In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:
If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
Colossians 1:21-23

Paul is made a minister of the message of reconciliation - of the gospel. And only those that hear and are given the Spirit of God are presented "holy and unblameabable and unreproveable in His sight". I fully agree that part of reconciliation is living lives approved of by God. But if that IS the message, then you only have a works salvation and not the gospel itself. The dividing line is whether or not one has the Spirit of God. Whether or not one is born of the Spirit of God :

But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
Romans 8:9

If everyone were born again, then everyone would have the Spirit of God. But Paul is clear that there are those that have NOT the Spirit of God. Otherwise, his "if" is a statement about something that isn't so. He is warning men about something that doesn't exist.

 

[nikolai_42]

One is not reconciled to God by doing what pleases Him. One pleases Him because one is reconciled to Him and is led by His spirit. Otherwise, reconciliation didn't require Christ's death. It just required obedience to the Commandments.

 

[Samie]

But the "we" of Romans 5:10 is speaking of the enemies of God that are reconciled to Him. Reconciliation - by this verse - makes friends of His enemies.

By his use of the word "we", Paul identified himself with those whom God reconciled to Himself by the death of His Son. And who are those?

As revealed on the cross, God fashioned humanity (Jews & Gentiles) into the body of His Son thereby creating a new man: Christ the head, humanity, with all its sins - 1 Pet 2:24, hence, enemies - the body, with the intent of reconciling it to Himself (Eph 2:14-16). When the Head died, the Body likewise died (2 Cor 5:14, 15; Heb 2:9). That death reconciled the Body to God (Rom 5:10), having done away with what separates man from God: sin (Eph 1:7; Col 1:14; 2:13; Rev 1:5).

When the Head was resurrected, the body was made alive TOGETHER WITH Him (Eph 1:4-6; Col 2:13, 14), born again into a living hope of life eternal (1 Pet 1:3; Titus 3:7).

What the Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world, took was the sin of the whole world (John 1:29), thereby reconciling the world - no one exempted nor left out - to God.

 

[Samie]

One is not reconciled to God by doing what pleases Him. One pleases Him because one is reconciled to Him and is led by His spirit.

Agree.

Otherwise, reconciliation didn't require Christ's death. It just required obedience to the Commandments.

Which is what the twin doctrine results in; and that is why this thread was started.