HEY CALVINISTS! Are we "Totally Depraved" from birth???

I am in agreement with Abraham: "And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:" Gen. 18.27

As I said, I believe the adoption is real in the sense that you do, it is resulted of the new birth, regeneration, justification, reconciliation, salvation, etc. In as much as it is the work of God as related to these it is completed, but in human experience it is yet future. That time of the bodily resurrection as the apostle says '...waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our bodies.'

I see this as the deliverance completed. If I have time I will post some thoughts the Lord has blessed me with on this topic in my preaching. As for now consider David, and Job along with Paul's statement:

David: "As for me, I will behold thy face in righteousness: I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness." Ps. 17.15

In context of this David is speaking also of that deliverance (vs. 13) but is looking to the day of resurrection I believe to which he shall behold the face of the Lord in righteousness. This does not deny that we are, through the redemptive work of Christ covered at present with his righteousness, but we have not realized this righteousness in the level we shall. It will be over and above the righteousness Adam originally enjoyed.

Job: "For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God: Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me." 19.25-27

The meaning I had in my earlier post is not that the saved are the same as the lost, but that the wages of sin still rule over our present bodies, or else there would be no saint dieing, but would be raptured. Again, I believe Job is looking forward to the day of resurrection when in the flesh he shall see the face of God, this is that future adoption. Though it is ever present in the knowledge of God it is not yet realized in His people.

You have provided the thoughts of the apostle Paul. There is found throughout scripture like references.

Forgive me, I can't really see any real disagreement here. I don't think the future adoption into the family of God at the resurrection jeopordizes the completed work of Justification, regeneration, and present knowledge of salvation, but I believe it is the hope of the saints that they look forward to a day of resurrection at which time this deliverance is fulfilled in the experience of the saints.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

As to the theme of adoption, 'Dr. C.I Scofield presents this same definition of adoption in the notes of the Scofield Reference Bible: "Adoption (kuiothesia,) 'placing as a son' is not so much a word of relationship as of position. The believer's relation to God as a child results from the new birth (John 1:12-13, whereas adoption is the act of God whereby one already a child is, through redemption from the law, placed in the position of an adult son (Gal. 4:1-5). . . . '

In other words, when a person comes to a faith in Jesus Christ he is transferred out of the family and watchful eye of the evil one, into the family of God as a son or daughter of the living God, because of of His willing adoption.

 

Thanks, I have and use a Scofield Bible. I believe the study of adoption, apart from Mr. Scofield's editorial notes will lead you to understand that adoption is a legal process, much like justification, so there is much more than the immediacy you assign to it. It is certain in the view of God, but is experential to the individual at the resurrection.

Bro. Dallas

 

Brother Dallas,

I used Dr. Chafer's Systematic Theology by way of the reference from Dr. Scofield about adoption. It seems that you are light on present adoption while in this life and merely pick up on the concept and future reality at His coming when we will be with Him. Thanks for the reminder of the legal fact of our adoption. I do believe we are adopted into the family of God when we are saved. Do you believe this also? And again, I believe that the completion of our transition from a bodily resurrection to a new spiritual body will take place at His coming. Romans 8:23 does not mean that we are not quite yet adopted but rather than He still has something to do with our human bodies.

'We have the Spirit as the first part of God's promise. So we are waiting for God to finish making us His own children, which means our bodies will be made free.' {The New Century Version}

 

I do believe in the eternal view of God we are adopted, but you, at least the NCV confirms my believe that adoption is yet future

Bro. Dallas

 

I am not sure if someone else has mentioned this but Psalm 51:5 "We were concieved in sin and brought forth from iniquity"

 

yeah, we have attempted to use Scripture.

Thanks brother.

Bro. Dallas

 

Without this all else is a dead work among men and the Word of God without the dealing of the Spirit will help no carnal man. 1 Cor. 2.14

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

It never works on arminians, though.

 

1 Corinthians 2:14 makes no sense at all out of its context, say from verse 10 through 16.

 

I should think the application of 1Co. 2:14 is obvious.

In context Paul is saying that the reason that the Corinthians do not apprehend the wisdom of God is due to their worldly nature.

Of course non-belivers are even more worldly than those Corinthian believers who at least had the Spirit indwelling them. So if the Corinthians are unable to understand spiritual truths, and obey them how mnuch more unable are unbelievers to do so?

See, as important as it is to interpret in context, it is also important to let the text make its own statements. Arminians here artificially limit the scope of the application of the passage to suit their own needs.

 

Explain how the "Armenians" limit the application of the scripture.

 

I don't know about "Armenians". I mentioned Arminians.

 

Does that mean you won't explain because of a perceived misspelling?

 

how is a mispeling perseifed?

Broder Dallas

 

Well, for one thing the misspelling isnot perceived. It is a fact.

For another, since you are arminian, you already know how you (mis)use the verse, and don't need me to explain it to you.

For yet another thing, the issue is whether the Calvanist application is warranted when taking the verse in context. It has been demonstrated that it is. Does your question mean that you won't address that?

 

IMO it is perfectly relevant. Whether or not you agree that the assertion that the natural man cannot comprehend the things of the spirit is indicative of total depravity, at least the assertion has the merit of actually appearing in the Bible. (As opposed to the "apostles are saved differently than the rest of us" doctrine, which is based on what the Bible does not say.)