1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Featured Semi-pelagian

Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by AustinC, Aug 3, 2022.

  1. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    17,861
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Not according to Psalms 58:3, ". . . The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. . . .". The implication sounds to me, that one is wicked before being born to speak lies at birth.

    And to me, Romans 9:11, ". . . For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, . . ." is Pelagianish. And checking it, it turned out the Greek being translated as "have done" singular for the plural. And "practice" is a plural and "practiced" is a past tense. The Greek plural of that word is only used twice in the New Testament. Romans 9:11 wasn't Pelagian in it's teach after all.
     
  2. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You are changing "as soon as they are born" to "before they are born" (and "as soon as they are born" is most likely a figure if speech rather than a scientific declaration).

    Romans 9:11 was never actually Pelagian in either translation. You viewed it as such, but most do not.
     
  3. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    17,861
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I explained my understanding.

    Also if the unborn are sinless then Romans 3:23 is not totally true.

    Then there is the issue of being conceived dead in sin do to the inherited knowledge of good and evil.
     
  4. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I understand your explanation.

    That said, the unborn having not committed any sinful actions does not make Romans 3:23 untrue.

    Often people approach Scripture in a way as to support their theology, as a history book of chronological events, or as a science book (or all three). IMHO this is a fatal error.

    The unborn are sinners by nature. But this does not necessitate that they committed sinful acts while in their mother's womb, or even upon being born.

    The earth is spherical. This does not make Isaiah 11:12 any less true.
     
  5. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    17,861
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Explain.

    This truth is not the problem. Except as noted, the supposed sinlessness.
    Revelation 20:12, ". . . dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. . . ."
     
    #25 37818, Aug 4, 2022
    Last edited: Aug 4, 2022
  6. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    In Romans 3 what is Paul's topic? Is it the moment man sins? No. Rather it is righteousness revealed through faith and not through the Law.

    Man is conceived on sin. We are by nature sinners, unrighteous. The unborn is no less unrighteous (remember, the Law did not make man unrighteous, rather it showed (or "taught") us our sin. Those not under the Law were no less sinners.

    The unborn are sinners from conception. They will not be justified via the Law.
     
  7. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    17,861
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    ". . . For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. . . ."
    The conception in a sinful nature has to do with the inherited knowledge of evil. From Genesis 2:9.
     
  8. JesusFan

    JesusFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    8,916
    Likes Received:
    241
    Babies are born sinners, correct?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. JesusFan

    JesusFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    8,916
    Likes Received:
    241
    We are born with a sin nature
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. JesusFan

    JesusFan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    8,916
    Likes Received:
    241
    Any and all who follow the teachings and theology of someone like Charles Finney!
     
  11. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    17,861
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I hold we are conceived with the sin nature.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Again, you are missing the context. What is Paul speaking about? The spectrum of age, from conception to elderly?

    No. He is speaking about Jews and Gentiles, those under the Law and those not under the Law.


    What sinful act do you believe a 2 day old fetus has committed?
     
  13. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No, Finney was a Presbyterian. You ate using a figure you think others will take as an insult to insult.

    Most are, perhaps, along the line of D.L. Moody in that they affirm a free-will theology while making very little (if anything) of the Calvinism vs non-Calvinism debate (they just find it juvenile).
     
  14. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Jon seems to vacillate on this. In a different thread he claimed that there was an "age of accountability" and while babies had a sin nature, they had not yet sinned and thus they were received into heaven as sinless.

    Yet, in a statement in this thread, Jon says "The unborn are sinners from conception. They will not be justified via the Law."

    So, which of Jon's statements is really what he holds to? I think John is trying to get out of what he recognizes was a Pelagian/semi-pelagian view that he claimed. He is now backtracking, which is fine by me.
     
  15. AustinC

    AustinC Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2020
    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    1,458
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Finney was Pelagian.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Of course. Otherwise Jesus would not have used little children as an example.

    The point is not sinful by nature but whether or not a day old fetus in it's mother's womb has actually committed an action that is sinful.
     
  17. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Perhaps.
     
  18. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    17,861
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Is Psalms 58:3 nonsense?
     
  19. JonC

    JonC Moderator
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    35,198
    Likes Received:
    3,791
    Faith:
    Baptist
    No. It speaks of sinfulness.

    The issue is you are caught up with sinful actions rather than the true problem - our sinfulness (our "sin nature").

    I ask AGAIN, what sinful ACTION do you believe a two day old fetus in it's mother's womb has done?
     
  20. 37818

    37818 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2018
    Messages:
    17,861
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Truthfully the written word does not give any specifics prior to birth. Romans 9:11 does not actually say "having done" in the singular. It is to be plural.
    You understand my view, insofar you do not agree with it. We also do not agree with the scope of "all" in Romans 3:23.
    We disagree on understanding these details. To me they are important.
     
Loading...