Featured Born Dead

Here is what the text you are pointing out - says of the "older son" - let's see if it fits the idea of "an infant who died".

===============

Luke 15
25 “Now his older son was in the field, and when he came and approached the house, he heard music and dancing. 26 And he summoned one of the servants and began inquiring what these things could be. 27 And he said to him, ‘Your brother has come, and your father has killed the fattened calf because he has received him back safe and sound.’ 28 But he became angry and was not willing to go in; and his father came out and began pleading with him. 29 But he answered and said to his father, ‘Look! For so many years I have been serving you and I have never neglected a command of yours; and yet you have never given me a young goat, so that I might celebrate with my friends; 30 but when this son of yours came, who has devoured your wealth with prostitutes, you killed the fattened calf for him.’ 31 And he said to him, ‘Son, you have always been with me, and all that is mine is yours. 32 But we had to celebrate and rejoice, for this brother of yours was dead and has begun to live, and was lost and has been found.’”


==================


The older son is not dead, he has been working in the field for years for his Father and is always obedient to the commands given.

It appears to fit the text better to see it as the perfect sinless obedience of unfallen angels for years - always doing the commands of God perfectly - than to claim that sinless human infants are serving God in His fields in perfect obedience all of those years.


in Christ,


Bob

 

You have to understand that the elder son has ALWAYS been in heaven. He got there a long time before his little brother who lived a full life down here. The elder son has been up in heaven working for many years.

The servants are angels, they are not running around here on earth for the most part, although they do visit on occasion.

The prodigal son is now saved. Now there is a big celebration for him. This compares with the big celebration Jesus spoke about earlier in heaven.

Luk 15:7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

Luk 15:10 Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.

Note that the elder son complained there had never been a celebration for him. This compares exactly with what Jesus said in verse 7. Note that Jesus spoke of 99 just persons which need no repentance in verse 7. The elder son did not need to repent, because he NEVER sinned.

It matches up perfectly, but you simply do not want to see it.

And again, the elder son was the BROTHER of the prodigal, not an angel.

 

If you make the argument that the older son is a sinless being in heaven - then you lose your argument for the sinless beings of earth.

The sinless beings in heaven do not have a sinful nature. I think both Calvinists and Arminians will agree to that.

But infants are in the group of Romans 3 that "do not seek God" even though they have a Savior and they make no conscious choice about esoteric concepts such as sin. Their natures have the bent toward evil. They need a Savior and they have one. So if they die - they are indeed covered.

But if they live the must eventually seek the new birth - death to self. A new creation with old things passed away all things become new (2Cor 5).

in Christ,

Bob

 

Boy, it is easy to see you would argue with a fencepost. Every time I answer one of your objections, you just make up another.

Look, there have been millions, if not billions of unborn, or very young children that have died. That is why I believe Jesus mentions 99 sheep that never went astray and need not repentance compared to the one sheep that went astray but was recovered.

We KNOW from Romans 9:11 that unborn children have done no evil.

Saying someone does not seek God does not prove we are born with a sin nature, and it does not prove inability, you have been conditioned to believe that.

If I said that NONE of my neighbors ever goes to church, no, not one, would you understand that to mean they CANNOT go to church? NO. No reasonable person would ever interpret a statement like that to mean that.

But that is exactly what you are doing with Romans 3, you are reading a sin nature and inability into this scripture, when it is simply stating a fact. It does not say these persons are unable to repent and seek God.

In fact, there is scripture that shows men seeking God.

2 Chr 19:3 Nevertheless there are good things found in thee, in that thou hast taken away the groves out of the land, and hast prepared thine heart to seek God.

God said good things were found in king Jehoshaphat and that he had prepared his heart to seek God. It does not say God had to regenerate him before he was able to seek God, it says he himself prepared his heart to seek God.

So, Romans 3 does not prove a sin nature or inability, it is simply a statement of fact that men do not seek God.

And you do not have to have a sin nature to sin. Satan was created perfect, and yet he sinned. Adam and Eve were created "very good" (Gen 1:31) and yet they were able to sin. All the angels were "very good" and yet one third of them sinned.

All that is required to sin is free will and a lack of faith in God's word.

 

Once again, who can argue against the ingenuity of Winman's exegesis?

Winman assures us that the elder brother, born sinless, died -- though still an infant or small child. Despite the clear testimony of Scripture that "the wages of sin is death," Winman knows better. In the case of the elder brother, Winman postulates, death came to the sinless child without reference to sin, thus making Winman of higher authority than the Holy Spirit.

Scripture tells us that the younger son requested his share of the inheritance which motivated the Father to divides his property between the two brothers.
The elder brother must still be alive at this point, otherwise, if he were dead, the younger son would have received all the property.

Therefore, in order to keep Winman's interpretation consistent, the younger brother must have been either an infant or smaller child when he approached the father for his share. That sounds reasonable, right?

Scripture continues: "Not many days later, the younger son gathered all he had and took a journey into a far country, and there he squandered his property in reckless living."

Of course, no infant/small child could be capable of such conduct. Thus, we must interpret the words, "not many days later" to mean "many years later." Again, that sounds reasonable, right?

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, "the elder son, a sinless infant, died and went to Heaven. There he faithfully worked hard in the heavenly fields for many years," Winman tells us with uncanny insight.

Now comes the kicker.

Scripture tells us that when the elder brother hears the music and celebration, he asks a servant -- an angel allegedly -- why the commotion? Upon hearing the response, the elder brother is angry and refuses to join the joy-filled proceedings.

Alas, we must now conclude that Heaven ain't all its cracked up to be. Pride, selfishness, anger.....all the typical sins of the flesh are still alive and well in Heaven. In this case, they reside in a sinless saint: the elder brother.

Thank you, Winman, for sharing your unique take on this classic parable. I'm sure many will draw comfort from it.

 

I didn't say the elder brother was without sin, JESUS DID.

Luk 15:29 And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:
30 But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.
31 And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.

Your argument is not with me, it is with Jesus, I am just believing what Jesus said.

If Original Sin is true, then no man is without sin, you are a sinner the moment you are conceived, you sinned in Adam. Jesus himself clearly refutes this in this parable. Why in the world would Jesus even say such a thing as this if Original Sin is true? He was not talking about the scribes and Pharisees, Jesus called them whited sepulchres full of dead men's bones, hypocrites, children of the devil. Jesus never so much as hinted the scribes and Pharisees were without sin, he condemned them.

But who could this be? The scriptures also tell us that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

The only reasonable answer is a little child. We are told that Esau and Jacob had done no evil in Rom 9:11. Jesus always spoke well of children, and told his disciples they must be converted and become as little children to enter heaven. So, the only reasonable view is that the elder son was a little child who died before he could ever sin.

The point of asking for the inheritance is that the prodigal considered his father dead, he rejected his father. This is when a person goes out in sin. You don't get your inheritance until your father is dead, this young man insulted his father and asked for his inheritance while he was alive.

It is not actually talking about property.

No, because little children do not know good from evil. The prodigal knew exactly what he was doing.

Wow, you actually got something right here. Yes, he was a young man when he went out, not a child.

Correct, the end of the parable takes place in heaven, just as Jesus had told of the celebration in heaven over the lost sheep and the lost silver piece.

Luk 15:7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

Luk 15:10 Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.

Note that the celebrations take place in heaven.

Hey, I am not the person who told this story, Jesus did.

You want to believe Augustine and Calvin that all men are born sinners because Adam decided to sin 6000 years ago, go ahead and believe that. I will believe God's word that says the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

If you do not want to believe there is such a thing as people who have not sinned, go ahead and believe that, but I will believe Jesus.

Mat 18:13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.

Luk 15:7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance.

Luk 15:29 And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:

I also believe Jesus when he said the prodigal was alive again, TWICE!

Luk 15:24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Luk 15:32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

I happen to believe that Jesus knows more about correct doctrine than Augustine, Calvin, Luther, and all your Reformed teachers. I don't believe Jesus would talk about people that could not possibly exist if OS were true. Jesus did not say nonsensical things.

I also believe Paul when he said he was alive without the law once. If Original Sin is true (it isn't) then it would be impossible for Paul to say this.

I also believe Peter when he said we are now returned to Jesus (1 Pet 2:25). If Original Sin is true, he could not possibly say this.

I believe Solomon when he said God has made man upright.

So, you keep on believing Augustine and Calvin and see where it gets you, I will believe Jesus, and Paul, and Peter, and Solomon.

Time will tell.

Your argument is not with me, I am not the one who said these things. Look in your Bible, I am not making these things up. Look and see for yourself.

 

Neither Winman or Bob understand this PARABLE! If you want to understand a parable you must look at the context and see WHO Jesus is speaking to and WHY or WHAT is the circumstance Jesus is addressing.

There are THREE parables all having to do with the very same theme and addressing the very same issue. Look at Luke 15:1-3 to see who he is addressing and why.

1 ¶ Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him.
2 And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth sinners, and eateth with them.
3 And he spake this parable unto them, saying,

1. He is addressing self-righteous pharisees and scribes - v. 2
2. These parable are addressed to "them" - v. 3
3. The purpose of the parables is to address the self-righteousness Pharisees and scribes who saw themselves better than "publicans and sinners" or saw themselves in NO NEED OF REPENTANCE - v. 1

Now, look at the consistent theme running through all three parables (sheep, coins, two sons).

1. There is one group NEVER LOST (99 sheep, 9 coins, elder son)
2. There is one group in need of repentance, lost, found (1 sheep, 1 coin, 1 younger son).
3. There is one major emphasis in all three, heaven rejoices over the group that knows there lost and repent.

The application is simple and clear! Those whom the Scribes and Pharisees scorned (publicans and sinners) knew they were sinners and knew they were lost and needed repentance (salvation) [lost sheep, lost coin, lost younger son]. However, the other group NEEDED NO REPENTANCE (Scribes and Pharisees) or 99 sheep, 9 coins and older son.

Jesus is addressing those who perceived themselves as BETTER THAN THOU who saw themselves in NO NEED OF REPENTANCE and presented them as such in the parabolic character of the 99 sheep, 9 coins and elder son.

However, in reality there is no such person who can claim "Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment:"

Notice there is NO REJOICING and NO FATTED CALF, and NO BRINGING HOME over the 99 sheep, 9 coins and elder son!

Jesus without these parables says it bluntly elsewhere to this same group:

30 But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners?
31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.
32 I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.


Remember, he is addressiing ADULTS and the ELDER son is no child and claims to SERVE for MANY YEARS and yet he claims he is absolutely sinless. No such ADULT human exists (apart from Christ) who has SERVED God for "MANY YEARS" and is without need of repentance.

Now neither one of you will except this obvious and clear interpretation of these parables but for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, let them see and hear!

 

Baloney, Jesus NEVER even hinted that the scribes and Pharisees were sinless. And I doubt the scribes and Pharisees themselves would claim to be absolutely perfect.

This is what Jesus said about the scribes and Pharisees;

Mat 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,
2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:
3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.
4 For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.
5 But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,
6 And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues,
7 And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi.
8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.
14 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye devour widows' houses, and for a pretence make long prayer: therefore ye shall receive the greater damnation.
15 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.
16 Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
17 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold?
18 And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.
19 Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift?
20 Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon.
21 And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein.
22 And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.
24 Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.
28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,
30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.
31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
33 Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:
35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.
37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.

Jesus condemned the scribes and Pharisees in the most harsh fashion, and now you want us to believe he is telling them they are sinless?

Nice attempt to explain away scripture that totally destroys Calvinism, but no gold ring for you.

 

Try a little bit of honesty! I never said that Jesus said they were sinless! I said that Jesus presented them AS THEY SAW THEMSELVES!

Second, the ELDER son is not an infant but has SERVED the Father for MANY YEARS and it is the ELDER son that claims to be sinless in his service to the Father! Jesus simply presented the Pharisees as they saw themselves just as he presented the elder son as he saw himself.

As I said, you do not have the spiritual capacity for truth and so it is a waste of time to argue with you.

 

So, you want us to believe Jesus was saying there were 99 Pharisees to every sinner in Israel? Or, in the case of the silver pieces, there are 9 righteous Pharisees for every sinner in Israel?

Not buying it.

The elder son could not be a scribe or Pharisee, Jesus said they were children of the devil, while the elder son was the son of the father (God).

Luk 15:31 And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

Did the father correct and rebuke the elder son when he claimed never to have sinned? NO, he actually confirmed what the elder son said was true. He called him "Son" and said, "thou art EVER with me". They were never separated by sin.

And note he distinguishes between the elder son and his prodigal brother. Only his brother was lost and dead.

Your interpretation completely fails.

 

Again, you are a dishonest human being! I never said no such thing and you know it! You are intentionally perverting my words and YOU KNOW IT!

Now, you resort to LITERALIZING a parable in order to escape the obvious. As I said before, you have no capacity for truth or honesty in any debate you enter.

Only in the eyes of men does such a human exist! No human being but Christ SERVES God for MANY YEARS and claims to be sinless - no, not one!

Your rants can't even be considered as an "interpretation" but pure foolish!

 

I seriously doubt that even the scribes and Pharisees would say they NEVER sinned.

Jhn 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

They knew they were sinners. They also understood why they were to give sin offerings.

Again, I doubt any Pharisee believed they had never committed a sin.

But again, the numbers don't line up, there certainly were not 99 Pharisees for every sinner in Israel.

Now, have there been many unborn or young children who have died before they could sin? YES, millions! Perhaps even billions! We probably have at least a million victims of abortion in this country each year. These babies have never committed a sin. There are easily 99 of these children for every sinner who repents. The numbers work here.

In Matthew 18 we see Jesus give the same example of the shepherd with 100 sheep. He is speaking of little children here, it cannot be denied.

Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 18:10 Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
11 For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?
13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.
14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

Jesus told his disciples they must be converted and become as little children to enter heaven. Was he telling them they must become wicked little sinners? Absolutely absurd!

Jesus then says that children have angels that always behold the face of his Father in heaven. Is he saying they are wicked sinners? Ridiculous!

He then repeats the story of the shepherd with 100 sheep. There are no scribes and Pharisees here. One goes out in sin, but 99 never went astray. When the one is recovered Jesus says it is not the will of his Father that ONE OF THESE LITTLE ONES should perish.

You can't wrest this passage.

 

First, you generalize when Christ was addressing a SPECIFIC group. Second, you pit scripture aganst scripture and make Christ appear foolish when he presents them as viewing themselves as "whole" and without need of any Physician in Luke 5:29-32 and it is Jesus that said he came not to call the righteous, which again you make Christ appear to be the fool for even suggesting such exists as you deny they exist.

 

Are you listening to yourself here? Who told this story? JESUS. It is Jesus who told us about this person you say cannot exist. It was not the scribes and Pharisees, it was JESUS.

You just don't get it, I am exposing your presupposition. You ASSUME no such person can exist, when JESUS himself told us about this person.

Are you calling Jesus a liar? Do you think Jesus does not know correct doctrine?

I didn't make this story up about the elder son who never sinned. I never made up the story about the 99 sheep who never went astray and need no repentance. I did not tell the disciples they must be converted and become as little children to enter heaven, JESUS did.

Who do you believe? John Calvin, or Jesus Christ?

They are not rants, they are scripture.

 

I believe you misrepresent what Jesus was saying. He was not saying the Pharisees considered themselves whole so much as he was saying these sinners knew they were sick and required a physician.

Mat 9:11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners?
12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick.
13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Jesus is directly answering the Pharisees. The reason he eats with publicans and sinners is because they are sick and require a physician.

But he is not saying the Pharisees believe themselves sinless; they give sacrifice, which is for sin. Yes, they believe they are sinless because they have given sacrifice. But they think the sacrifice itself is a good work, and not a representation of God's work on behalf of their sin. They think it merits salvation, not that it relies on faith that God will die for them.

But again, this has nothing to do with Matthew 18 where Jesus is talking about children.

 

Like I said, you have no capacity for truth and so it does not matter how much evidence is placed before you as you will ALWAYS explain it away, pervert it and reinterpret to fit your foolishness.

 

Is this your answer for everything? To claim that anyone that disagrees with you cannot know truth? Not much of an argument.

You haven't placed evidence in front of me, you have presented an argument that has far more holes in it than mine does.

You say the 99 just persons who need no repentance are the Pharisees. So there are 99 Pharisees for every sinner in Israel? Very poor argument.

There are millions, if not billions of children who have died before they could commit sin? Very good argument.

Your argument is that Jesus creates persons of fantasy to correct the Pharisees. VERY POOR ARGUMENT, Jesus did not speak idle or fanciful words, even in parables.

That persons die before they could sin, very good argument. We know from scripture itself that infants have not sinned.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

We know David's child that died was not lost.

2 Sam 12:23 But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.

If Original Sin is true (it isn't), this child should have went to hell, being a sinner. We know the child did not go to hell, because David was absolutely saved, and David said he would go to this child.

Of course, you do not like this scripture that shows unborn and little children are not sinners, because it refutes Calvinism. When it comes to scripture versus Calvinism, you will choose Calvinism every time. :thumbs:

Too bad, scripture refutes you whether you like it or not.

 

Your arguments are completely and totally foolish! Anyone who will take a person who is called the "ELDER" son and who claims to have SERVED the Father for MANY YEARS and depict them as sinless or examples of one born without sin, will pervert and explain away anything and everthing that opposes such a foolish interpretation.

I gave you the FACTS!

FACT#1 - He is addressing the scribes and pharisees not believers - v. 3

FACT#2 - He is responding to their SELF-RIGHTEOUS attitude of better than thou of those who acknowledge themselves to be sinners - v. 2

FACT#3 - The reoccurring theme that ties all three of these parables together is that there is "MORE" joy in heaven over one who repents than over one WHO NEEDS NO REPENTANCE. Indeed, only those pictured as lost and found are taken home, rejoiced over, are given a robe, a ring and a sacrifice.

FACT #4 - The eldest Son is a more explicit picture of the 99 sheep and 9 coins that are characterized in the words "NO NEED OF REPENTANCE" [as that is not true of any true child of God no matter how long they live] and the claim that he HAD NEVER SINNED against his father for MANY YEARS as the "ELDER" son.

Only a biased blind interpreter can't see the obvious picture presented by these contextual facts. Why should I discuss the issue with you any further as you cannot even accept the clear obvious facts and the clear obvious application. Then to take the cake you pervert, abuse and absolutely mutilate the Lord's obvious meaning to the same bunch in Luke 5. Forget it! I have better use of my time. Those who have ears to hear and eyes to see have already benefited.

 

Correct.

No, he is showing that these "sinners" are loved and valued by God, that God would leave 99 sheep who are not lost and go out and diligently seek for one lost sinner, and that there is greater joy over this lost sinner who is saved, than 99 that were never lost.

But Calvinism teaches that God allows billions of persons to perish. He could save them if he wanted to, he could regenerate every single one of them, but he chooses to "pass them by" and let them perish. Your doctrine teaches the EXACT OPPOSITE of what Jesus was teaching here.

The reoccurring theme is that none were originally lost. The sheep was not originally lost, he was one of the 100 of the shepherd's flock. He went out and became lost, the shepherd searched and recovered him.

The woman originally had TEN pieces of silver. NONE were lost. One became lost, she searched diligently until she found it.

The prodigal son was not originally lost, he was at home with his father and brother. He went out and became lost. When he repented, twice Jesus said he was alive again. If Original Sin was true, no man could be said to be alive again.

That is the reoccurring theme.

There is no such thing as a person that has not sinned and needs no repentance if Original Sin is true. You believe that every person sinned in Adam, that every man was in his loins, that Adam was every man's representative. The Bible never says this, but Augustine did, and you believe Augustine. The scriptures say the son shall not bear the iniquity of his father.

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

You ridicule me, but you must admit I am able to present a great deal of scripture that all supports my view. If I am a false teacher, I am amazingly good at it, much better than you are at presenting a scriptural argument for your view. You cannot present one scripture that says men are born dead in sin, I challenge you to show that.

I am not a false teacher, I believe what scripture says. Your argument is that scripture does not mean what it obviously says. Your argument is that Jesus did not know what he was talking about when he said the prodigal son was alive AGAIN. No, you know better than Jesus himself!

And this is the biggest laugh of all, you would argue with Jesus himself. It is Jesus that said the prodigal was alive again. You know as well as I do that that would be impossible if Original Sin is true.

Paul said he was alive without the law once. You know that would be impossible if Original Sin is true.

You know Peter said we are RETURNED to Jesus in 1 Pet 2:25. You know that this is impossible if Original Sin is true.

I am believing scripture for what it says, even you accused me of "literalizing" scripture. I plead GUILTY! Yes, I believe Jesus when he said the prodigal son was alive AGAIN, I believe Paul when he said he was alive without the law once, and I believe Peter when he said we are RETURNED to God. I believe Solomon when he said God has made man upright.

You are accusing me of believing scripture as if that is a sin. Wow.

 

Likeo I said, a waste of time!