Spiritual death. What exactly is it?

[SovereignGrace]

I will start this thread by quoting a portion of DHK's(I know you have been occupying a lot of my time lately, but you will grow to appreciate me )post from another thread.

You have a wrong definition of "dead". It simply means "separated." All unsaved are spiritually separated from God, as Adam was when he sinned. Notice that though Adam sinned he was still able to communicate with God.

He repeatedly states that 'death means separation', and while that may be true, there really is more to it than just separation. As he has used many times, it states As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.[Jas. 2:26] Lazarus was physically dead because his spirit had left his body, and thereby, making his physical body lifeless. No amount of crying 'get up', no amount of pleading 'please wake up' will cause his body to hear their voices. Why? The body is dead.

Now, let us look a little deeper into spiritual death. As God told Adam “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”[Gen. 2:16b,17] After Adam and Eve ate of that tree, they died spiritually. I am sure all are in agreement up to 'here'. What caused them to spiritually die? The obvious answer is sin, but it is deeper, much deeper than that, in my opinion. The Tree of Life was there and they could freely eat of that. It was their Life source. Once they rebelled and sinned, God thrusted them out of the Garden, therefore, their Life Source was cut off and 900+ years later they physically died.

The reason why sinners are spiritually dead is they are cut off from God, who is the only source of Spiritual life. The body without the spirit within it, is dead. The spirit of man without God's Spirit is dead. As Paul wrote For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God, [Col. 3:3] and also I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I now live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.[Gal. 2:20]

So death may be 'separation', but to stop there is faulty hermeneutics. It is death, unable to respond to the gospel without God's intervention.

 

[percho]

IMHO, 'spiritual death," is a figment of the imagination.

Death is death and life is life.

YLT Gen 2:17 and of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou dost not eat of it, for in the day of thine eating of it -- dying thou dost die.'

Meaning Adam was created, carnal, flesh and blood, sold under sin.

The day Adam and Eve ate they became dead in trespass and sin. Meaning.

The moment death came to them in the flesh, that is the Spirit of the breath of life returned to God who had given it, they would be dead. (IMHO, that is the death Jesus, the sinless one, paid for our sins) There would be no redemption from that death unless it came from God.

Thanks be to God, that before the foundation of the world, it was determined the Christ, as of a lamb, without spot and without blemish, would shed his blood, wherein the Spirit of the breath of life from God resided, to redeem the sinners from death.

By the Lamb being regenerated from the dead by Spirit the God, his Father. The Son would receive the promise of God , for whom it had been made. See 1 Peter 3:18 and Gal 3:19,21.

 

[DHK]

I will start this thread by quoting a portion of DHK's(I know you have been occupying a lot of my time lately, but you will grow to appreciate me )post from another thread.

He repeatedly states that 'death means separation', and while that may be true, there really is more to it than just separation. As he has used many times, it states As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.[Jas. 2:26] Lazarus was physically dead because his spirit had left his body, and thereby, making his physical body lifeless. No amount of crying 'get up', no amount of pleading 'please wake up' will cause his body to hear their voices. Why? The body is dead.

Now, let us look a little deeper into spiritual death. As God told Adam “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat from it you will certainly die.”[Gen. 2:16b,17] After Adam and Eve ate of that tree, they died spiritually. I am sure all are in agreement up to 'here'. What caused them to spiritually die? The obvious answer is sin, but it is deeper, much deeper than that, in my opinion. The Tree of Life was there and they could freely eat of that. It was their Life source. Once they rebelled and sinned, God thrusted them out of the Garden,

But you are wrong here. This is not a true statement. Go back and read the account. You said:
"Once they rebelled and sinned God thrust them out of the Garden."

How terribly wrong could you be!
Once they sinned:
1. They were conscience of their sin, ashamed, and went and hid themselves.
2. They covered themselves with fig leaves--very conscious of their shame and sin.
3. The could hear the voice of the Lord (even though they were dead) walking in the cool of the day.
4. Therefore, amongst the trees of the garden they hid themselves from the presence of God.
5. Though God is omniscient, he takes steps to bring them to repentance. He calls them. "Where art thou Adam"?
Remember two things here. God knows all the answers to the questions he is asking. Two Adam is "dead" separated from God, and yet still talking to God. They are still in Eden. According to Calvinists this conversation is impossible.
6. Adam responds. He heard God's voice in the Garden and was afraid, for he was naked.
7. God speaks to Adam: "Who told you, 'You were naked,' Have you eaten of the tree that I commanded you not to eat?"
8. Now Adam blames Eve. "The woman you gave me, she gave me the fruit and I ate of it. (In fact he is blaming God at the same time).
9. God questions Eve. "What is this that thou hast done."
10. Eve blames the serpent: "The serpent beguiled me and I did eat."

In verses 14-19 is The Fall, the judgement that God pronounces upon Adam, Eve, the serpent and even the ground is cursed.

Then in verse 21, one of the most important events takes place, while still in the Garden of Eden, an event you left out of your brief account:
Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
--God Himself provided the very first sacrifice in the Bible. Blood was shed on behalf of Adam and Eve. The coats of skin were not to keep warm. They had the perfect climate. It never changed. There was no pollution, no climate change, etc. It was like one large climate-controlled greenhouse. The coats of skin were out of mercy; the blood, out of grace. They had been brought back into a right relationship with God once again.

But then the judgment of their rebellion took place after their restoration:
]Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

With all that you missed out, your statement is false.
It is not right to say: "Once they sinned they were kicked out of the garden."
They weren't. A lot happened before they "were kicked out of the garden."


2. God came seeking them:

 

[SovereignGrace]

But you are wrong here. This is not a true statement. Go back and read the account. You said:
"Once they rebelled and sinned God thrust them out of the Garden."

How terribly wrong could you be!

Au contraire mon frere. What I meant was they were thrusted out of there after they rebelled and sinned. I left out their conversing because we both know the details.

Once they sinned:
1. They were conscience of their sin, ashamed, and went and hid themselves.

Yes.

2.They covered themselves with fig leaves--very conscious of their shame and sin.

Sinners will try to cover their sins.

3. The could hear the voice of the Lord (even though they were dead) walking in the cool of the day.

So could Satan and his minions. You lose here.

4. Therefore, amongst the trees of the garden they hid themselves from the presence of God.

The unregenerate flee from God, mon ami, and do not run towards Him.

5. Though God is omniscient, he takes steps to bring them to repentance. He calls them. "Where art thou Adam"?
Remember two things here. God knows all the answers to the questions he is asking. Two Adam is "dead" separated from God, and yet still talking to God. They are still in Eden. According to Calvinists this conversation is impossible.

Look at the sequence. Man sins. God comes to them and they flee. God finds them hid. They wanted nothing less than to talk to Him, for Him to find them. Salvation is God overtaking the lost even while fleeing from Him. Google the hymn 'I was a wandering sheep' and it tells how God works salvation into sinners.

God spoke to Satan and His minions. God spoke with Cain. You lose here.

6. Adam responds. He heard God's voice in the Garden and was afraid, for he was naked.

God can converse with the dead, both physically and spiritually. We can not. You lose here.

7. God speaks to Adam: "Who told you, 'You were naked,' Have you eaten of the tree that I commanded you not to eat?"

Yes.

8. Now Adam blames Eve. "The woman you gave me, she gave me the fruit and I ate of it. (In fact he is blaming God at the same time).

Yes.

9. God questions Eve. "What is this that thou hast done."

Yes.

10. Eve blames the serpent: "The serpent beguiled me and I did eat."

Yes. People always want to pass the blame on others.

In verses 14-19 is The Fall, the judgement that God pronounces upon Adam, Eve, the serpent and even the ground is cursed.

Yes.

Then in verse 21, one of the most important events takes place, while still in the Garden of Eden, an event you left out of your brief account:
Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.

Yes. If God had not made a covering, an atonement of their sins. He had mercy upon them and shed innocent blood to atone their sins. Without the and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.[Heb. 9:22]

--God Himself provided the very first sacrifice in the Bible. Blood was shed on behalf of Adam and Eve. The coats of skin were not to keep warm. They had the perfect climate. It never changed. There was no pollution, no climate change, etc. It was like one large climate-controlled greenhouse. The coats of skin were out of mercy; the blood, out of grace. They had been brought back into a right relationship with God once again.

Yes. However, they were ushered out of the Garden. There was a consequence to their sin and that was physical death and spiritual death that would fall upon their posterity.

But then the judgment of their rebellion took place after their restoration:
Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

With all that you missed out, your statement is false.
It is not right to say: "Once they sinned they were kicked out of the garden."
They weren't. A lot happened before they "were kicked out of the garden."

I left that out because all knew this was a certainty. I did this to not get too lengthy.

2. God came seeking them:

YES!!!

 

[BrotherJoseph]

But you are wrong here. This is not a true statement. Go back and read the account. You said:
"Once they rebelled and sinned God thrust them out of the Garden."

How terribly wrong could you be!
Once they sinned:
1. They were conscience of their sin, ashamed, and went and hid themselves.
2. They covered themselves with fig leaves--very conscious of their shame and sin.
3. The could hear the voice of the Lord (even though they were dead) walking in the cool of the day.
4. Therefore, amongst the trees of the garden they hid themselves from the presence of God.
5. Though God is omniscient, he takes steps to bring them to repentance. He calls them. "Where art thou Adam"?
Remember two things here. God knows all the answers to the questions he is asking. Two Adam is "dead" separated from God, and yet still talking to God. They are still in Eden. According to Calvinists this conversation is impossible.
6. Adam responds. He heard God's voice in the Garden and was afraid, for he was naked.
7. God speaks to Adam: "Who told you, 'You were naked,' Have you eaten of the tree that I commanded you not to eat?"
8. Now Adam blames Eve. "The woman you gave me, she gave me the fruit and I ate of it. (In fact he is blaming God at the same time).
9. God questions Eve. "What is this that thou hast done."
10. Eve blames the serpent: "The serpent beguiled me and I did eat."

In verses 14-19 is The Fall, the judgement that God pronounces upon Adam, Eve, the serpent and even the ground is cursed.

Then in verse 21, one of the most important events takes place, while still in the Garden of Eden, an event you left out of your brief account:
Gen 3:21 Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD God make coats of skins, and clothed them.
--God Himself provided the very first sacrifice in the Bible. Blood was shed on behalf of Adam and Eve. The coats of skin were not to keep warm. They had the perfect climate. It never changed. There was no pollution, no climate change, etc. It was like one large climate-controlled greenhouse. The coats of skin were out of mercy; the blood, out of grace. They had been brought back into a right relationship with God once again.

But then the judgment of their rebellion took place after their restoration:
]Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
Gen 3:23 Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken.
Gen 3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

With all that you missed out, your statement is false.
It is not right to say: "Once they sinned they were kicked out of the garden."
They weren't. A lot happened before they "were kicked out of the garden."


2. God came seeking them:

Brother DHK,

You are speculating and assuming Adam was not regenerated immediately after the fall. We do not know the precise time his regeneration occurred, however we know it at least occurred by Genesis 3:21 because we read God clothed Adam and Eve with the skins in this verse, "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them." This could be typological of putting on Christ. To put it another way, God condescended to make the very first sacrifice for sin to Adam and Eve. The slaying of this animal...the shedding of the blood surely was a type of God slaying his only begotten many years later. I also think the fact that Adam and Eve named their son Seth is clear enough that they were trusting in the promise of Gen 3:15. Also, God speaking to Adam does not prove your point, for he also spoke to Cain.

Brother Joe

 

[percho]

Why was Adam created?

Was it so the following man could come into the world and therefore Adam could be redeemed, from death?

But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. Gal 4:4

The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. 1 Cor 15:56

Whose, Son, was the man Jesus?

And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. Matt 16:16,17

When was it ordained, the Christ, the Son of the living God, would redeem Adam?

Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 1 Peter 1:18-20

Why was Adam going to need to be redeemed.

For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. Romans 7:14 Unto death.

What death> Where does it come from?

Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through (the) death he might destroy him that had the power of (the) death, that is, the devil; Hebrews 2:14

How long had the devil been administering death?

He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:8


Through what man, was the Son of God, the Son of Man, going to be manifested?

Death for Adam and also for Jesus was required.

Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Acts 15:18

I guess everybody believes God knows what he is doing? Read the ten verses before that last one posted and you will also know what, God, is doing.

 

[DHK]

Brother DHK,

You are speculating and assuming Adam was not regenerated immediately after the fall. We do not know the precise time his regeneration occurred, however we know it at least occurred by Genesis 3:21 because we read God clothed Adam and Eve with the skins in this verse, "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins, and clothed them." This could be typological of putting on Christ. To put it another way, God condescended to make the very first sacrifice for sin to Adam and Eve. The slaying of this animal...the shedding of the blood surely was a type of God slaying his only begotten many years later. I also think the fact that Adam and Eve named their son Seth is clear enough that they were trusting in the promise of Gen 3:15. Also, God speaking to Adam does not prove your point, for he also spoke to Cain.

Brother Joe

No, on the contrary, I said nothing about regeneration and never intended to bring that subject into this conversation. The subject is "the definition of death." How can a "dead" Adam converse with God? According to Calvinism the "dead" cannot communicate with God, for they are as a corpse with no life unable to do anything spiritual at all.
"In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," God said.
Adam ate; Adam died.
Adam still carried on a conversation with God. SG fails to admit this, and seems to go to great lengths to deny it. But the fact is He still answered the questions God posed to him. He did not remain silent. His answers were directed to God, not Eve nor to the serpent. They both were talking to God, though they were dead!
To this the Calvinist still has no answer. SG certainly in all that he wrote didn't provide a suitable one. How does a dead man speak to the living God.

The "God spoke to Satan," answer is just a deflection; a red herring.

 

[SovereignGrace]

No, on the contrary, I said nothing about regeneration and never intended to bring that subject into this conversation. The subject is "the definition of death." How can a "dead" Adam converse with God? According to Calvinism the "dead" cannot communicate with God, for they are as a corpse with no life unable to do anything spiritual at all.
"In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," God said.
Adam ate; Adam died.
Adam still carried on a conversation with God. SG fails to admit this, and seems to go to great lengths to deny it. But the fact is He still answered the questions God posed to him. He did not remain silent. His answers were directed to God, not Eve nor to the serpent. They both were talking to God, though they were dead!
To this the Calvinist still has no answer. SG certainly in all that he wrote didn't provide a suitable one. How does a dead man speak to the living God.

The "God spoke to Satan," answer is just a deflection; a red herring.

Non, mon ami, non. The spiritually dead can not hear the preaching of the gospel. They are spiritually dead, deaf, blind. Once quickened by God they DO hear. Preachers can not speak to the dead, but God does. :thumbsup:

 

[SovereignGrace]

No, on the contrary, I said nothing about regeneration and never intended to bring that subject into this conversation. The subject is "the definition of death." How can a "dead" Adam converse with God? According to Calvinism the "dead" cannot communicate with God, for they are as a corpse with no life unable to do anything spiritual at all.
"In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," God said.
Adam ate; Adam died.
Adam still carried on a conversation with God. SG fails to admit this, and seems to go to great lengths to deny it. But the fact is He still answered the questions God posed to him. He did not remain silent. His answers were directed to God, not Eve nor to the serpent. They both were talking to God, though they were dead!
To this the Calvinist still has no answer. SG certainly in all that he wrote didn't provide a suitable one. How does a dead man speak to the living God.

The "God spoke to Satan," answer is just a deflection; a red herring.

God in the flesh spoke so plain a four days dead man heard and obeyed. The dead hear God. Satan spoke with God. You lose monsieur. :thumbsup:

 

[Rippon]

Non, mon ami, non. The spiritually dead can not hear the preaching of the gospel. They are spiritually dead, deaf, blind. Once quickened by God they DO hear. Preachers can not speak to the dead, but God does. :thumbsup:

Well, I'm sure you meant that the unregenerate can physically hear the gospel, but spiritually it cannot penetrate unless God quickens them.

 

[SovereignGrace]

No, on the contrary, I said nothing about regeneration and never intended to bring that subject into this conversation. The subject is "the definition of death." How can a "dead" Adam converse with God? According to Calvinism the "dead" cannot communicate with God, for they are as a corpse with no life unable to do anything spiritual at all.
"In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," God said.
Adam ate; Adam died.
Adam still carried on a conversation with God. SG fails to admit this, and seems to go to great lengths to deny it. But the fact is He still answered the questions God posed to him. He did not remain silent. His answers were directed to God, not Eve nor to the serpent. They both were talking to God, though they were dead!
To this the Calvinist still has no answer. SG certainly in all that he wrote didn't provide a suitable one. How does a dead man speak to the living God.

The "God spoke to Satan," answer is just a deflection; a red herring.

I never said such as this. You need to either quit lying or start repenting. Show me where I said such a thing. I'll be waiting, mon ami.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Well, I'm sure you meant that the unregenerate can physically hear the gospel, but spiritually it cannot penetrate unless God quickens them.

Oui, monsieur. It takes spiritual ears to truly hear the gospel.

 

[Rippon]

I never said such as this. You need to either quit lying or start repenting. Show me where I said such a thing. I'll be waiting, mon ami.

DHK habitually lies about our beliefs.

Samples from his sinful keystrokes:

"You have no regard for the promises of God, the attributes of God, the nature of God,etc. You portray him as a monster out of control who can do as he pleases."

"It's obvious you know nothing about the scripture and blindly follow a man."

"I believe in sola scripture. Apparently you do not."

"You [do not] follow Christ or the Scriptures."

It is shameful for a "moderator" to conduct himself in such an intemperate manner. And apparently he has the full approval of the admins here to behave the way he does regularly --especially one who is supposedly a missionary.

Apparently a Canadian mod can get away with such behavior. Anyone else would be banned.

 

[SovereignGrace]

DHK habitually lies about our beliefs.

Samples from his sinful keystrokes:

"You have no regard for the promises of God, the attributes of God, the nature of God,etc. You portray him as a monster out of control who can do as he pleases."

"It's obvious you know nothing about the scripture and blindly follow a man."

"I believe in sola scripture. Apparently you do not."

"You [do not] follow Christ or the Scriptures."

It is shameful for a "moderator" to conduct himself in such an intemperate manner. And apparently he has the full approval of the admins here to behave the way he does regularly --especially one who is supposedly a missionary.

Apparently a Canadian mod can get away with such behavior. Anyone else would be banned.

In my first response to DHK, I wrote 'God can speak to the dead, both physically and spiritually. We can not. You lose here.'

 

[BrotherJoseph]

No, on the contrary, I said nothing about regeneration and never intended to bring that subject into this conversation. The subject is "the definition of death." How can a "dead" Adam converse with God? According to Calvinism the "dead" cannot communicate with God, for they are as a corpse with no life unable to do anything spiritual at all.
"In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die," God said.
Adam ate; Adam died.
Adam still carried on a conversation with God. SG fails to admit this, and seems to go to great lengths to deny it. But the fact is He still answered the questions God posed to him. He did not remain silent. His answers were directed to God, not Eve nor to the serpent. They both were talking to God, though they were dead!
To this the Calvinist still has no answer. SG certainly in all that he wrote didn't provide a suitable one. How does a dead man speak to the living God.

The "God spoke to Satan," answer is just a deflection; a red herring.

It is true you didn't explicitly say Adam was not regenerated, but you used Adam as an example to say how can God speak to one who is spiritually dead in sins, however if Adam was regenerated at the time God spoke to him he would not be considered spiritually "dead", thus your implication was that he was not regenerated when God spoke to him which you can not prove, can you? Also, you are not defining total depravity, no theologian I know contends God cannot speak to one who is dead in sins, I bet you can't name one. For example, nobody would deny Jesus spoke to the Pharisees and that God spoke to Nebuchadnezzar whatever side of the theological fence they are on .

 

[SovereignGrace]

BrotherJoseph,

God spoke with Satan, and he is as spiritually dead as any can be. What is impossible with man, is possible with God.

When we preach to the lost, they are in an unregenerate state and can not hear, truly hear the gospel, being dead, having deafened ears. The word has no avenue to travel into their hearts, where it needs to go. The sin-hardened hearts can not accept the word so that it can take up root and grow. It is like placing a seed on a concrete porch. The seed is good, but the place you place the seed is not. God has to change the heart by implementing a new heart, a heart that can, and does receive the seed(word), and it grows, being in fertile ground.

 

[Iconoclast]

I never said such as this. You need to either quit lying or start repenting. Show me where I said such a thing. I'll be waiting, mon ami.

:laugh::laugh:.....

Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil......:wavey::thumbs:

 

[DHK]

DHK habitually lies about our beliefs.

This is a lie: something that deserves an infraction, for it is an attack as well.

Samples from his sinful keystrokes:

"You have no regard for the promises of God, the attributes of God, the nature of God,etc. You portray him as a monster out of control who can do as he pleases."

I am entitled to my opinion. If you don't like it don't participate.

"It's obvious you know nothing about the scripture and blindly follow a man."

When you keep parroting the doctrines of TULIP and not scripture what would you expect one to say. I don't retract my statement.

"I believe in sola scripture. Apparently you do not."

When Calvin is quoted, and other sources relied upon, instead of using the Bible as your only authority, then something is wrong isn't it. Note the word "apparently."

"You [do not] follow Christ or the Scriptures."

In your expose of Calvinism were you following the Scriptures or following Calvinism at the time that I wrote that statement. Notice these snippets have no context, no URL. In fact the reader doesn't even know if I made them or not. They simply have to take your word for it.

It is shameful for a "moderator" to conduct himself in such an intemperate manner. And apparently he has the full approval of the admins here to behave the way he does regularly --especially one who is supposedly a missionary.

It is shameful for you to make a post like this. Perhaps I should repost it in the administration forum for all the moderators to see what kind of poster you really are. Do you think you are edifying? Do you think that you are keeping the rules in making a post like this?

Apparently a Canadian mod can get away with such behavior. Anyone else would be banned.

Apparently you don't think a moderator, Canadian or otherwise, has the right to post. You need to go sit in a corner and cool off.

 

[DHK]

I never said such as this. You need to either quit lying or start repenting. Show me where I said such a thing. I'll be waiting, mon ami.

You have said this many times, perhaps countless. It is the standard Calvinist position. What was my position?
Adam, being a dead person, carried on a conversation with God.

And you denied this, and want me to repent?? No, not at all.

Non, mon ami, non. Here is where you are missing the point. ALL SINNERS hate God. Why do I say that. Sinners are in darkness, having no Light within them and Light has no fellowship with Light. When you was a sinner, you hated God. You may not have went around telling people you hated God, but you hated Him by your deeds. As Jesus so plainly put it “If you love me, keep my commands"[Jn. 14:15] and also "Whoever has my commands and keeps them is the one who loves me. The one who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love them and show myself to them”[Jn. 14:21] and finally If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love.[Jn. 15:10] None of us in our fallen state had the ability, the wherewithal to keep His commands, so by our deeds, we hated Him.

Adam was spiritually dead when he sinned, just as you described above here:
https://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2252251&postcount=63

He was separated from God, dead in his sin. "Sinners are in darkness having no Light within them and Light has no fellowship with Light...None of us in our fallen state had the ability, the wherewithal to keep his commands, so by our deeds, we hated him." (your words) This would apply to Adam who lost his fellowship with God, and by God's definition died, the day he ate of that fruit.

 

[Rippon]

This is a lie

You know it is very well the truth that you habitually lie about the beliefs of Calvinists --you have been doing it for ages. Pastor Larry called you on it a number of times. You have never retracted your lies which you repeat ad nauseum.

I am entitled to my opinion. If you don't like it don't participate.

If anyone else were to have said the kinds of "opinions" you state with regularity they would be banned. You completely negate your testimony with your "opinions" which are completely false and utterly shameful.

When you keep parroting the doctrines of TULIP and not scripture what would you expect one to say. I don't retract my statement.

You have no ammo except to spew forth vile remarks.You have no basis or right to say I "know nothing about the scripture and blindly follow a man." Anyone reading my posts would know how lame that charge is.

Go through my posts and try to ignore all the Scripture I post. It is a giant lie on your part.

As for following a man : You have used that line over and over with me and a number of others through the years. It has to stop DHK. You have no legitimate response, so you use that line as merely an attack vehicle. I am not dependant on any man for my theology. I don't consult the one you constantly bring up before I post in theology threads.

So you depend on lies for your daily thrusts and jabs. You can't stick with the issues at hand. You are led along by your hatred of Calvinism and you have to throw your brand of mud into the mix. You cannot help yourself. Only God can do that.

When Calvin is quoted,

The thing is:You quote him far more than I. You bring him up when no one else on a thread has. You are obsessed with him. You need to be in treatment for your affliction.

and other sources relied upon,

Are you claiming that you don't offer links and quotes of your favorites? I rarely do.

instead of using the Bible as your only authority,

The Bible is my authority. I do not quote from it for fun. It is the Word of God. Much of the Word of God is what you rebel against.

then something is wrong isn't it.

"Something" certainly is. You have been wrong to falsely accuse the brethren for so long. You have been wrong to resort to lies and misrepresentations instead of being truthful. You resort to pure spitefulness much of the time.

Fairness has been your theme song for ages. Yet to look at your posting history you dwell in the land of pettiness and mean-spiritness. You thrive in
doing the very opposite of what you claim you believe in.

In your expose of Calvinism

You lost your train of thought.

were you following the Scriptures or following Calvinism at the time that I wrote that statement.

You charged me with "not following Christ or the Scriptures" out of your regular bad conduct. You apparently are given carte blanche to say anything you want with no restrictions placed upon your behavior.

It is shameful for you to make a post like this.

And the thing is: Most of it consisted of your very words! The shame is draped on your head for saying them in the first place.

Do you think that you are keeping the rules in making a post like this?

Do you actually think DHK? As I said, the majority of my post consisted of quoting your own words. You should be embarrassed, but some people, such as yourself, cannot even blush when confronted with their sin.