Theology Club: Why is it believed that all men are condemned from birth?

[Cross Reference]

Good luck, Wbm. I don't believe your effort is going to net you much in the way of rational replies. His corrupted "nexus" is beyond what I bargained for __ beyond the ability to at least, reason.

 

[Lighthouse]

Quit playing with my words. Grow up. Get understanding. Read your Bible. Learn the elementary truths of it before stepping out to challenge anyone.

John 3:18

It seems I know the Bible much better than you. And you are the one who threw out the challenge. Maybe you should take your own advice.

 

[Cross Reference]

John 3:18

It seems I know the Bible much better than you. And you are the one who threw out the challenge. Maybe you should take your own advice.

You presume much with little understanding to support your juvenile attitude.

 

[Word based mystic]

My whole angle is affirming the sovereignty of God. Calvinism views a god who will not save all men (which is His will) because of election. Arminianism views a god who cannot save all men because of free will. I view a God who not only wills all men yo be saved but will also perform His will.



I do not see why you brought this up when it is exactly what I said...



Amen!



We only have concious thoughts because we exist. We cannot claim that we do not think without confirming that we do. Your analogy is way off base.



Same thing here, you overexagerate the concept in order to make a mockery of it. Selfawareness isnt something you understand it is something you have.



You have that backwards. We only know what pleasure is because we have experienced the lack of pleasure which we call "pain".



This one is just rediculous. Many things exist without life. Even you will exist when the life you have is gone. We can only know life and appreciate because we experience the lack of life which we call death.



Evil doesnt exist, neither does cold, etc. Those are just terms we use to discribe the lack of the positive. All you do is make yourself look uneducated...

every time i made a statement i was making fun of your ideas.

i LOL after making fun of your ideas.

those are not my ideas they are yours can you not read that i was making ridiculous statements on your quotes.

i rarely mock but you deserved these. I quoted you and then showed how ridiculous that logic was....

 

[Ardima]

every time i made a statement i was making fun of your ideas.

i LOL after making fun of your ideas.

those are not my ideas they are yours can you not read that i was making ridiculous statements on your quotes.

i rarely mock but you deserved these. I quoted you and then showed how ridiculous that logic was....

You mean facts? Science has proven such things between hot and cold. It is only logical that it is the same with the spiritual because the physical is a shadow of the spiritual. There are attributes that God must have to be the Eternal One. Nothing we find in scripture when viewed correctly go against those attributes. All doctrine must be in line with the nature of God or that doctrine is incorrect. Free will in the sense that most use it here on TOL goes against the nature of God. God has given man a will and lets him choose to love God or not, but in regards to salvation it was accomplished for all in Jesus Christ just as it was planned before time began. The only way Adam would not have sinned is if God did not create him with a sinful nature to begin with. God took responsibility for the "fall" and therefore is the only one responsible for salvation. To claim responsibility for something only God provides is treading dangerous waters.

 

[Lon]

throwing a few distraction pics to lighten the mood from all the many weighty and lofty discussions.

lol

Such might be seen as trolling or side-railing though. Generally inoffensive doesn't get banned, unless you are asked to refrain or push it overboard.

Why is it believed that all men are condemned from birth?

I was going to do the 'because all women are smarter than us' shtick...

We are "condemned" (marked for the trash heap) at birth because we are born in the grips of sin and death as our master. That's why we are condemned from birth. Every human dies so we are born already with an expiration date that isn't supposed to be there - "condemned."

 

[patrick jane]

quote from ardima " So what you are saying is that I am wrong simply because you thing man has free will? The doctrine of free will is"

you ignore much of scripture in order to affirm your calvin gospel.

your whole angle is looking through calvin eyes.

adam was given not (promised) dominion over the earth.
within the command to subdue came the ability and dominion.

the earth does not long for the manifestation of the sons of God for no reason.

you also quote "Humans understand things by contrast. You only know what "hot" is because we have experienced "cold." This applies to every part of creation. We only understand the Love of God because we have experienced condemnation"

that quote is pure speculation. kinda like we only conscious thought because at one time we once had no thoughts. lol
or
we only understand self awareness because we at one time were unaware.
lol

we only understand pain is bad because we can experience pleasure.
lol

we only understand life because at one time we did not exist and in that non existence we understood what that non existence meant.

you promote an occultic yin/yang goobley gock. balance and contrast baaahhh occult yin yang

no good without evil LOL

God needs an evil counterpart to exist lol
this contrast theory is really silly

ok, whew. i thought you were saying that stuff for a sec. i see now what you were doing. i almost didn't see the QUOTE at the top -

 

[Word based mystic]

ok, whew. i thought you were saying that stuff for a sec. i see now what you were doing. i almost didn't see the QUOTE at the top -

yeah
i am in my very busy 12 hour days of restoration work/pressure washing.

that post wasn't my best and was left hanging for clarity.

2 minutes till out the door and another 11 hour day

 

[Cross Reference]

You mean facts? Science has proven such things between hot and cold. It is only logical that it is the same with the spiritual because the physical is a shadow of the spiritual. There are attributes that God must have to be the Eternal One. Nothing we find in scripture when viewed correctly go against those attributes. All doctrine must be in line with the nature of God or that doctrine is incorrect. Free will in the sense that most use it here on TOL goes against the nature of God. God has given man a will and lets him choose to love God or not, but in regards to salvation it was accomplished for all in Jesus Christ just as it was planned before time began. The only way Adam would not have sinned is if God did not create him with a sinful nature to begin with. God took responsibility for the "fall" and therefore is the only one responsible for salvation. To claim responsibility for something only God provides is treading dangerous waters.

Indeed, God did take responsibility for the fall of man. That is why He provided a way out for man, even from the beginning: "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? Accepted by who?? " and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." Genesis 4:7 (KJV). This must accepted or it is no longer God's "fault". OMT: Irrespective of the "fall", is this not an example of evidence that God was looking for a people [disciples] for His purpose with willing obedience remaining as the test?

Now, what were you saying about mans will in the matter or God needing to gift something additional to man for man to obey His Word? You apparently believe God needed to do that with Adam because you say God created him with a sinful nature, even though there could have been no sin in Adam which, had there have been, would have revealed God to us as being "unjust". That was just a hypothetical you no doubt will close your mind to.

Both Adam and Jesus came into existence by the direct hand of God. Both were innocent when they came in. The Joy of the Lord kept Jesus. What kept Adam?

 

[Cross Reference]

Such might be seen as trolling or side-railing though. Generally inoffensive doesn't get banned, unless you are asked to refrain or push it overboard.

I was going to do the 'because all women are smarter than us' shtick...

We are "condemned" (marked for the trash heap) at birth because we are born in the grips of sin and death as our master. That's why we are condemned from birth. Every human dies so we are born already with an expiration date that isn't supposed to be there - "condemned."

What shallow understanding is this from a Professor to be received as truth by his learners?? Such stupidity should be viewed as sin.

FACT:: Innocence-blamelessness is not and never was nor ever can be condemned by God. That IS God's Word! Therefore . . . . .

Am I angry? YES! Lon should know better!

 

[Cross Reference]

I am still looking for a clear response to the OP. Obviously it has to be because of the various doctrines that speak of it being that way of a necessity to support the foundations of those doctrines. Are those doctrines accurate?

 

[Ardima]

Indeed, God did take responsibility for the fall of man. That is why He provided a way out for man, even from the beginning: "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? Accepted by who?? " and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him." Genesis 4:7 (KJV). This must accepted or it is no longer God's "fault". OMT: Irrespective of the "fall", is this not an example of evidence that God was looking for a people [disciples] for His purpose with willing obedience remaining as the test?

Yes it is evidence that God was looking for a people for His purpose with willing obedience as the test. Only Calvinists would object to that. I would never claim that God did not provide man with a will; however, that will is limited. Willing obedience has nothing to do with salvation, but willing obedience has everything to do with loving God for providing our salvation.

Now, what were you saying about mans will in the matter or God needing to gift something additional to man for man to obey His Word? You apparently believe God needed to do that with Adam because you say God created him with a sinful nature, even though there could have been no sin in Adam which, had there have been, would have revealed God to us as being "unjust". That was just a hypothetical you no doubt will close your mind to.

I said that Adam was created with a sinful nature, meaning he had the potential to sin. (I can prove through scripture that it existed in man before the "fall".) It was this sinful nature that Satan took advantage of when he enticed Eve. That nature was not a problem until Adam and Eve gained possession of the knowledge of good and evil. Why do you think it was that specific tree that was forbidden?

Both Adam and Jesus came into existence by the direct hand of God.

There are many who would vehemently reject this statement.

Both were innocent when they came in.

Yes they were; however Adam was able and did lose that innocence whereas Jesus did not because he was not of Adam.

The Joy of the Lord kept Jesus. What kept Adam?

Please elaborate on this if I get the meaning wrong. The promise of the Savior kept Adam, and all other OT saints. We place our faith in what God has done in Jesus Christ whereas they (OT saints) placed their faith in what God would do in Jesus Christ. Both have faith to the same end.

 

[Cross Reference]

Yes it is evidence that God was looking for a people for His purpose with willing obedience as the test. Only Calvinists would object to that. I would never claim that God did not provide man with a will; however, that will is limited. Willing obedience has nothing to do with salvation, but willing obedience has everything to do with loving God for providing our salvation.

Our willing obedience has nothing to do with redemption. It most certainly has everything to do with our salvation, redemption provides for and is the the new foundation upon which a new creation is built. "You call Me Lord and don't keep My commandments" __ of what good are we to Him if we live like that?

Salvation is a choice given man after he has been presented the evidence of Jesus Christ and the Government of God that can only lead to the eternal life man desires. cf John 17:3 KJV.

I said that Adam was created with a sinful nature, meaning he had the potential to sin. (I can prove through scripture that it existed in man before the "fall".) It was this sinful nature that Satan took advantage of when he enticed Eve. That nature was not a problem until Adam and Eve gained possession of the knowledge of good and evil. Why do you think it was that specific tree that was forbidden?

You can't prove one word of any of that and the rest you postulate is silly. Where did you read such nonsense and WHY do you want to believe it is even more silly. What does it profit you in doing so __ nothing!

There are many who would vehemently reject this statement.

There are even more who vehemently reject all rest of scripture as well. That's not my worry. You are doing a fairly good job.

Yes they were; however Adam was able and did lose that innocence whereas Jesus did not because he was not of Adam.

Then Jesus wasn't of David either or born of Mary. Can't you see how silly it sounds to say Jesus wasn't of Adam? Gen 3:15 should close the issue.

Please elaborate on this if I get the meaning wrong. The promise of the Savior kept Adam, and all other OT saints.

I know what kept Jesus in His temptation and said so. What was intended to keep Adam BEFORE he sinned, is what I was getting at. Got an answer?

We place our faith in what God has done in Jesus Christ whereas they (OT saints) placed their faith in what God would do in Jesus Christ. Both have faith to the same end.

That is all well and good, however, salvation isn't the issue, becoming a glorified son, is ___ after one is saved and born again. See Heb 2:10 KJV.

 

[Ardima]

Our willing obedience has nothing to do with redemption. It most certainly has everything to do with our salvation, redemption provides for and is the the new foundation upon which a new creation is built. "You call Me Lord and don't keep My commandments" __ of what good are we to Him if we live like that?

We willingly obey out of love because we come to know the truth of our salvation. This is what it means to work out our salvation. Its not that we do good works to be saved its that we do good works because it is impossible not to if you know Jesus Christ as your savior.

Salvation is a choice given man after he has been presented the evidence of Jesus Christ and the Government of God that can only lead to the eternal life man desires. cf John 17:3 KJV.

Faith and obedience is the choice given to man after he has been presented the evidence of Jesus Christ as our Salvation.

You can't prove one word of any of that and the rest you postulate is silly. Where did you read such nonsense and WHY do you want to believe it is even more silly. What does it profit you in doing so __ nothing!

(1st John 2:16) For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Now note the next verse which is before sin occurs.


(Genesis 3:6) And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, (lust of the flesh) and that it was pleasant to the eyes, (lust of the eyes) and a tree to be desired to make one wise, (pride of life) she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

All three things listed by John that are not of the Father, but are of the world, are listed in Genesis chapter three, in order, before the "fall." It is not a coincidence!

Then Jesus wasn't of David either or born of Mary. Can't you see how silly it sounds to say Jesus wasn't of Adam? Gen 3:15 should close the issue.

It is not "silly." Joseph was in the line of David shown in Matthew. All birthrights were passed down through the male. Jesus was considered the son of Joseph firstborn of Mary and rightful heir of the thrown of David. This is how Jesus is legitimately from David.

You are right, Genesis 3:15 does clear it up. Please notice that God told Eve that the savior would be of her seed, no mention of Adam's seed at all. This is directly referring to a male child that would be born of a virgin (no earthly father and no male seed). It was a prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus.

I know what kept Jesus in His temptation and said so. What was intended to keep Adam BEFORE he sinned, is what I was getting at. Got an answer?

Adam wasn't intended to be "kept" before he sinned. As I have said many times; it was planned that way.

That is all well and good, however, salvation isn't the issue, becoming a glorified son, is ___ after one is saved and born again. See Heb 2:10 KJV.

Well that is where mans will comes in and chooses to be diligent and obedient...

 

[Cross Reference]

We willingly obey out of love because we come to know the truth of our salvation.

So it is we need to obey that our love TO Him be evidenced.

This is what it means to work out our salvation.

Overcoming is what working it out is all about.

Its not that we do good works to be saved its that we do good works because it is impossible not to if you know Jesus Christ as your savior.

No. Lord

Faith and obedience is the choice given to man after he has been presented the evidence of Jesus Christ as our Salvation.

Faith isn't given for salvation and obedience must follow for it to be evidenced.
God did not create mental cripples nor did they become so because Adam's transgression.

(1st John 2:16) For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Now note the next verse which is before sin occurs.

(Genesis 3:6) And when the woman saw that the tree*was*good for food, (lust of the flesh) and that it*was*pleasant to the eyes, (lust of the eyes) and a tree to be desired to make one*wise, (pride of life) she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

All three things listed by John that are not of the Father, but are of the world, are listed in Genesis chapter three, in order, before the "fall." It is not a coincidence!

Nor do they make any connection in my thinking things through.

It is not "silly." Joseph was in the line of David shown in Matthew. All birthrights were passed down through the male. Jesus was considered the son of Joseph firstborn of Mary and rightful heir of the thrown of David. This is how Jesus is legitamately from David.

In the natural that is so but only to fulfill by proxy the male lineage of Jesus because Joseph was NOT in the lineage of Jesus but Mary, who was of Nathan the brother of Solomon, son of David, was , which satisfied all prophecy [Gen3:15 in particular]

You are right, Genesis 3:15 does clear it up. Please notice that God told Eve that the savior would be of her seed, no mention of Adam's seed at all.

That is correct which only points up the above understanding re Joseph by proxy.

This is directly refering to a male child that would be born of a virgin (no earthly father and no male seed). It was a prophecy of the virgin birth of Jesus.

Again, you support my understanding given you. Thank you..

Adam wasnt intended to be "kept" before he sinned.

Neither was Jesus! He was on His own!

As I have said many times; it was planned that way.

Well, say it some more and be wrong still . It wasn't planned.

What was planned was with regards to Adam's failure that should it occur, and it did, God had already prepared a way out for man that, in the end, would net Him a vast family of sons He decreed for Himself __before the beginning of the world:

"Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. John 17:24 (KJV)

"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Ephesians 1:4 (KJV)

"Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you," 1 Peter 1:20 (KJV)

"and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain." Revelation 13:8 (ESV)

"Well that is where mans will comes in and chooses to be diligent and obedient"...

In that, you correct and his obedience must be not coerced but, willingly given __ stemming from that [kinetic] love to God you above mentioned that will lead him in the way of the agape road experience. Jesus said I am the Way, the Alpha and Omega of the journey Home to Father's House.

 

[Ardima]

So it is we need to obey that our love TO Him be evidenced.



Overcoming is what working it out is all about.




No. Lord



Faith isn't given for salvation and obedience must follow for it to be evidenced.
God did not create mental cripples nor did they become so because Adam's transgression.



Nor do they make any connection in my thinking things through.



In the natural that is so but only to fulfill by proxy the male lineage of Jesus because Joseph was NOT in the lineage of Jesus but Mary, who was of Nathan the brother of Solomon, son of David, was , which satisfied all prophecy [Gen3:15 in particular]



That is correct which only points up the above understanding re Joseph by proxy.


Again, you support my understanding given you. Thank you..



Neither was Jesus! He was on His own!



Well, say it some more and be wrong still . It wasn't planned.

What was planned was with regards to Adam's failure that should it occur, and it did, God had already prepared a way out for man that, in the end, would net Him a vast family of sons He decreed for Himself __before the beginning of the world:

"Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. John 17:24 (KJV)

"According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Ephesians 1:4 (KJV)

"Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you," 1 Peter 1:20 (KJV)

"and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain." Revelation 13:8 (ESV)



In that, you correct and his obedience must be not coerced but, willingly given __ stemming from that [kinetic] love to God you above mentioned that will lead him in the way of the agape road experience. Jesus said I am the Way, the Alpha and Omega of the journey Home to Father's House.

We got off topic again. Your OP has nothing to do with the lineage of Christ, and it seems that we are in agreement of that. And though I feel that what you believe about God's plan of Salvation violates the sovereignty of God, We can agree that it doesn't change the end result of Salvation.

Now in regards to the OP, the verses that I have shown you in regards to the sinful nature of man (1st John 2:16 and Genesis 3:6) still stands and supports what I have said about all men being condemned from birth because, just as the Levites payed tithes in Abraham; man has been condemned to die in Adam. If this were not so then babies wouldn't be able to die if they were truly innocent and blameless. "in Adam all die, in Christ all will be made alive." Calvinists would try to turn that into, "in Adam all die, all in Christ will be made alive." (sorry, off topic again.)

 

[Lon]

What shallow understanding is this from a Professor to be received as truth by his learners?? Such stupidity should be viewed as sin.

FACT:: Innocence-blamelessness is not and never was nor ever can be condemned by God. That IS God's Word! Therefore . . . . .

Am I angry? YES! Lon should know better!

Ah, there you go. Your true colors come out and show. ▲This▲ and your heresies, are why you are on ignore. I can address the issue but I choose to bow out now and am repeatedly sorry I ever posted in one of your threads.

You and I are NOT the first to debate this topic nor will be the last. Too bad you can't pull yourself together past your own myopia. See ya CR.

 

[Cross Reference]

Ah, there you go. Your true colors come out and show. ▲This▲ and your heresies, are why you are on ignore. I can address the issue but I choose to bow out now and am repeatedly sorry I ever posted in one of your threads.

You and I are NOT the first to debate this topic nor will be the last. Too bad you can't pull yourself together past your own myopia. See ya CR.

My heresies, you say? The real issue of your "TOO BAD" is the fact you can't be adjusted in your c*** sure attitude and continue to present your Calvinist bane as being the gospel truth. Combine that with your mis-representation of the words of others disguised in ontological bs, purposed to detract away from the subject matter into confusion, and know that is where my anger originates with you and most other arrogant, elitist Calvinist. Indeed, TOO BAD!

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;" Romans 1:18 (KJV)

 

[Cross Reference]

So if man was born condemned and babies are blameless/innocent because they are not under the law nor can be, how is it man is born condemned?

 

[Desert Reign]

I said that Adam was created with a sinful nature, meaning he had the potential to sin. (I can prove through scripture that it existed in man before the "fall".) It was this sinful nature that Satan took advantage of when he enticed Eve. That nature was not a problem until Adam and Eve gained possession of the knowledge of good and evil. Why do you think it was that specific tree that was forbidden?

I appreciated reading you in this thread.
I think you may have a few minor things wrong here. The Calvinists don't see 'sinfulness' as a mere potential to sin. They see it as a propensity. They say that the only choices a normal person has are to sin or to sin more. A Calvinist here has emphasised that people sin because they are already sinful in their natures and have no ability to choose not to sin.

Of course I disagree with this and I suppose you do too but I am not sure you grasp how far reaching Calvinism is. Some Calvinists find the idea that babies will automatically be condemned too distasteful and so they have concocted a way round the problem by saying that whilst all men the moment they are born are sinful, nevertheless babies haven't actually sinned and since condemnation is for sin, then the babies won't be condemned. There are obvious problems with this from the point of view of self-consistency. In the case of babies they have admitted that the doctrine of predestination is not always true because it would be logical to kill babies at birth to secure them a place in eternal life. But if God has predestined all people already, then if we do murder babies we have either got round that predestination or we were the instruments of those babies being granted eternal life. This seems a completely depraved way of thinking. It is also renders the whole concept of inherited sinfulness as the reason why God shows mercy to some as meaningless.

Also, God commanded Adam not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. It was a command, not a prophecy. Adam had the choice not to.
However, I agree that Adam did not fall from something. This can be proved by the fact that God stationed an angel to prevent Adam from also eating from the tree of life. So he cannot have eaten from the tree of life before. He was in fact neither mortal nor immortal before he ate the fruit from the tree.