Did Adam reach age of responsibility before

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Lori: The notion of Jesus atonement for our sins is also rejected by Rabbinical Judaism. So what??

HP: But Lori, the CONCEPT was CLEARLY there, it is just that most did not accept ‘Jesus’ as The Messiah.

 

[lori4dogs]

Obviously some did Lori, most likely formed at the feet of the heathen philosophers like Philo and others.

One thing is for certain. Our heritage is not a heathen heritage, but a Judeo Christian one. According to the well known scholar of Jewish antiquity, the renowned scholar Alfred Edersheim, the notion of all dying spiritually or morally in Adam was “entirely unknown to Rabbinical Judaism.” Somehow I knew that reading Scripture and applying God given intuitive principles of justice.

I suppose you would just write off Mr. Edersheim as a less than reasonable man as well. Oh well.

Honestly, I have been trying to find ECF's who may have held to your belief. Even Tertullian, who did not support infant baptism, advanced the belief in OS. Are you aware of any ECF's who wrote in support of your position?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Lori, did I miss your comment of DHK's interpretation of the words 'child' or 'children'? Possibly you might give us your take on the passages in the Word of God that DHK has posted.

Lori, I do not go searching after Roman Catholic ECF’s to bolster or base my interpretations of the Word of God. If you do, go for it. The Word of God and the Holy Spirit are trustworthy guides.

I cannot think of one revival of religion in history that has not had its roots in following a different path than what might at the time or in times past been even termed as the ‘orthodox’ way of thinking.

Philo had a clear influence upon many in the Church. Of a truth, no such notion as the dogma of original sin existed in the early Church prior to the father of the doctrine of original sin, Augustine, introducing it to the Church and mandating allegiance and adherence to its error.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Let the reader be reminded and aware. Just as DHK has evinced for us the fine art of interpreting Scripture via presuppositions, the writings of any and all, ECF’s or otherwise are often treated in the same manner. Even the very interpretation of the writing of men from their original languages are often tainted to support certain viewpoints, even as has happened to the very Word of God. Error abounded in the early church just as it abounds today. Let God’s Word be true and every man, including any and all ECF’s and their dogmas, a liar.

 

[lori4dogs]

Lori, did I miss your comment of DHK's interpretation of the words 'child' or 'children'? Possibly you might give us your take on the passages in the Word of God that DHK has posted.

Lori, I do not go searching after Roman Catholic ECF’s to bolster or base my interpretations of the Word of God. If you do, go for it. The Word of God and the Holy Spirit are trustworthy guides.

I cannot think of one revival of religion in history that has not had its roots in following a different path than what might at the time or in times past been even termed as the ‘orthodox’ way of thinking.

Philo had a clear influence upon many in the Church. Of a truth, no such notion as the dogma of original sin existed in the early Church prior to the father of the doctrine of original sin, Augustine, introducing it to the Church and mandating allegiance and adherence to its error.

So, the ECF's are Roman Catholic? I know this is going to come as quite a shock to a lot of people who post here. Just when do you say the RCC started?

. . . ' no such notion as the dogma of original sin existed in the early Church prior to the father of the doctrine of original sin, Augustine,'

I presented my evidence to the contrary. No, it wasn't dogma but the belief was definitely held by those much closer to the apostles, before Augustine and much closer to time of the writers of the New Testament than people in the mid 1800's. You dismissed my sources as 'Roman Catholics'. Do you have any evidence of writers in the early Church that held your position? Catholic or otherwise?

BTW, I'll let DHK present his/her own interpretations of the scriptures he/she posted.

 

[lori4dogs]

HP: I believe my comments on others you have posted is sufficient for now. We have our hands full with dealing with all the passages DHK has listed. Let’s try to address those passages first.

Why don’t you give us your take on his interpretation of the word ‘child’ or ‘children’?

'WE have our hands full'

I'm curious, how many people are working on this??

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Lori, you did not provide one scintilla of evidence for anything other than some question possibly novel to your own mind. I never stated some prior to Augustine did not believe in some concept that might be closely associated with that which Augustine introduced to the Church. I even gave you supporting evidence, straight from the source, the heathen philosopher Philo. Many in the so-called ECF’s list most likely studied heathen philosophy. Augustine was a master of it before his conversion.

You even agreed with my contention by stating it was not a recognized dogma. It clearly was not forced as a dogma without which one was outside of the Christian faith as it was after Augustine introduced it and presented it as cardinal dogma. Even if they would have, that would not make the dogma of original sin any less a notion developed straight from the playbook of heathen philosophers, in particular, Philo. On thing is for certain. The dogma of original sin did not have its roots in our Judeo heritage nor from the writing of the NT.

As I stated, closer to the apostles does not magically relate to closer to the truth or less liable to be influenced by heathen philosophy as you seem to be enamored with. That is a purely sophistic notion without the least shred of real truth to it. Error abounded throughout that whole period just as we see on this list still abounding today.

Onward to the Word of God, principles of immutable justice and first truths of reason.... and DHK's wild and erroneous conclusions concerning the words 'child' or 'children.' Give us your take Lori. :thumbsup:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Lori: I'm curious, how many people are working on this??

HP: Oh just let your mind wonder!:laugh:

 

[DHK]

BTW, I'll let DHK present his/her own interpretations of the scriptures he/she posted.

Good idea. Since HP hasn't read what I have posted, or clearly has misrepresented what I have posted many posts (if not pages) ago.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK, what have I misrepresented concerning your comments?

Nice way to duck the real issues Lori.:wavey:

 

[lori4dogs]

Was not ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN the man responsible for Augustines conversion? Possibly Ambrose was as steeped in Philo’s heathen philosophical ideas as was Augustine.

What I cannot understand is why would you desire to seek out the writings of Roman Catholic leaders to establish your theology?? If they missed so many other doctrinal issues, would it be any surprise that they missed in on original sin as well? They may be your fathers but I dare say I do not claim them as my own. As for me, I will stick to Scripture, reason, and principle of immutable justice.

I seek out writers (ECF's) such as Ignatius, Polycarp because they were taught directly from the Apostle John. You say they are 'Roman Catholic leaders'?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I don’t remember you quoting them. Did I miss something?

 

[DHK]

DHK, what have I misrepresented concerning your comments?

Nice way to duck the real issues Lori.:wavey:

You not only have misrepresented me, you have assumed and inferred things that I have not said and do not believe. Bearing false witness is wrong.

Furthermore I would like you to answer for your denial of the deity of Christ in these two posts:

Here we see an expression of the prophet Ezekiel under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and Christ in an expression of bewilderment over the sins of His chosen children. They both seem in amazement as to ‘why’ those that have had every opportunity and had been the recipients of Divine favor for hundreds of years would turn from the God that loved and cared so much for them.
http://baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1494606&postcount=44

Why men sin is a mystery that even Christ could not evidently comprehend or understand.
http://baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1494554&postcount=41

Your assertion that Christ is not God or omniscient is horrendous!!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Your assertions are beyond any scope of reason DHK. You are beside yourself.

 

[DHK]

Your assertions are beyond any scope of reason DHK. You are beside yourself.

Then I will gladly hear you answer for yourself with any reasonable explanation. I simply quoted what you said and gave the URL, from which it was quoted.

 

[lori4dogs]

I don’t remember you quoting them. Did I miss something?

Nope, haven't quoted them on this thread. But I have on past threads and will probably on future threads. I did, however, quote a lot of contemporaries of these faithful followers of our Lord and Savior who held the belief in original sin. Again, you dismissed them because you said they are 'Roman Catholic leaders'.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: You not only have misrepresented me, you have assumed and inferred things that I have not said and do not believe. Bearing false witness is wrong.

HP: I kindly asked you to produce the evidence of your assertions that I have misrepresented you.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Lori: Again, you dismissed them because you said they are 'Roman Catholic leaders'.

HP: Can you produce that quote?

​

 

[lori4dogs]

Was not ST. AMBROSE OF MILAN the man responsible for Augustines conversion? Possibly Ambrose was as steeped in Philo’s heathen philosophical ideas as was Augustine.

What I cannot understand is why would you desire to seek out the writings of Roman Catholic leaders to establish your theology?? If they missed so many other doctrinal issues, would it be any surprise that they missed in on original sin as well? They may be your fathers but I dare say I do not claim them as my own. As for me, I will stick to Scripture, reason, and principle of immutable justice.

You also said, 'Lori, I do not go searching after Roman Catholic ECF’s to bolster or base my interpretations of the Word of God.'

 

[DHK]

Then I will gladly hear you answer for yourself with any reasonable explanation. I simply quoted what you said and gave the URL, from which it was quoted.

Still waiting. Why the denial of the deity of Christ?