Search results

Good point. That's why I mentioned Biola. I forgot what we were talking about.

Academically, I hear they are doing excellent work in the field of Biblical Studies. I've read blogs of those in their PhD program (Good example of a PhD student and their academic rigor here), and they are sharp. They have good profs. And they are putting out an awesome commentary series on...

Yet another problem with the anit-calvi sentiment here. Calvinism is only wrong if it is unscriptural, not if it is illogical or makes God out to be a liar. Catch my drift... you are arguing on a philosophical level, which is ok for some. But that in essence misses the point. Calvinism is...

Biola has a great philosophy department. They may be a bit more conservative and what you are looking for. Friend and colleague earned his MA in philosophy from Biola after getting his MDiv from TEDS. He highly recommends Biola.

Glad you mentioned this point. I think the language of v. 12 disqualifies Jesus. I believe in order to qualify for imputed sin, you must be able to have death "spread" to you. Since Jesus was virgin born, he is disqualified from the requirement of imputed sin, the qualification being to have...

Bingo! :thumbs:

To have death is to be guilty. So if our death comes from Adam, the logical conclusion is that the guilt is also from Adam. Plus, v. 19 makes it clear that we are appointed sinners by Adam's sin. It is not about inheritance. It is about imputation. The context of v. 13 makes that clear...

A) that supposition was never proven B) I didn't rely on Augstine but Scripture. C) You bingo'ed pontification. Argue the points of exegesis.

Laughing at myself:laugh:. Yes I meant "sin". Adam's sin was our first sin. The end of v. 12 makes that clear. Actually, if you had been following my points and posts all along, you would see that not only is this not an exageration, it is the Pauline way he used the Greek word the ESV...

Didn't you just prove and admit the point that death is spread to those that have not sinned, thus Adam's sin is imputed? Why else would babies die?

Please! Point out one post where I have relied on a theologian as my basis of beliefs!!! I have argued everything from Scripture and used 1 guy (Charles Hodge) to back up my statements. Is this really your best tactic to refute me? You have left many of my points unanswered. I would suggest...

1) The imputed win would be the first sin, "because all sinned." 2) It does that very clearly in 5:19 w/ the use of the phrase "many were appointed sinners." 3) What is more is that the subject here is ADam's imputed sin otherwise v. 13 would not say anything about imputed sin. The fact that...

Huh??? The NWT supplies the English indefinite article b/c "god" in the Grk is anarthrous. But I don't see the relationship to not calling the Greek article "definite" since it has other meanings and functions than definiteness.

At this point in my life, I'm a supra- (and not the Toyota kind ;))

Here the distinction between all is made. Notice again that to help bear out the contrast, the same verbiage is used. But that is not even the point here. You keep relying on this as your only argument, but the fact is that Paul is using completely acceptable language to communicate a glaring...

I think you are making the text say more than was intended. Paul was making a contrast and so used identical verbiage to communicate the contrast even more boldly. This really puts the focus on the one act of disobedience and the one act of righteousness. Plus, you have to consider the fact...

No... Paul is using death to prove that there was a law and thus God is just to impute sin. Read it again. All men die because sin is imputed. Sin can be imputed because though it would be unjust to impute w/ no law, there was a law (cf. Rom 2:14-15). The conclusion Paul wants the readers to...

It is not my argument but Paul's. He was the one that contrasted the act of righteousness w/ the act of sin. You have to remember that Paul was speaking to believers, not potential Christians. So their imputation of righteouness was just as secure as their imputation of sin and guilt. Rm...

Some here have made it clear that they have a different view from the standard view of original sin. I want to express my view (w/ some a short exegesis of Rom 5) and hear the opposing views. Hopefully, we can have good dialogue on the issue. Simply put, I believe that Adam (as my...

Here's a challenge (which you already passed), never ever call it "definite article" insinuating that Greek has indefinite articles. As you put it, Greek simply has articles. Maybe we should do a thread of of an example of the most abused Greek or Hebrew grammar/syntax/or lexis.