Adam and Eve

[JD731]

That's a lot of words to avoid my question. I will try again, and hope you answer it.

What is the difference between morally neutral and innocent?

Morally neutral would not be perfect either, but it would mean innocent, would it not?

"Innocent" is a Bible word to which scripture gives its meaning. Comparisons can be studied in contexts to determine the mind of God on it's use and meaning. "Morally neutral" is a phrase you have made up and one must go into your head to know what you mean by it.You probably don't even know. This is a practice that is leading you away from God, not to him, IMO. You can't use Bible words because you cannot accept their meanings.

 

[AustinC]

"Innocent" is a Bible word to which scripture gives its meaning. Comparisons can be studied in contexts to determine the mind of God on it's use and meaning. "Morally neutral" is a phrase you have made up and one must go into your head to know what you mean by it.You probably don't even know. This is a practice that is leading you away from God, not to him, IMO. You can't use Bible words because you cannot accept their meanings.

You are still dancing around the question and not answering.

What is the difference between morally neutral and innocent?

It is clear, you are refusing to answer because you know they are synonyms and thus you are stating the same thing that Pelagius stated about infants. You are caught in a box and your only escape is to not answer the question.

 

[JD731]

You are still dancing around the question and not answering.

What is the difference between morally neutral and innocent?

It is clear, you are refusing to answer because you know they are synonyms and thus you are stating the same thing that Pelagius stated about infants. You are caught in a box and your only escape is to not answer the question.

I am wise enough to know that was what you were getting at. [Snip] Whether they are sinners makes no difference to you. Yet all sins that are listed as damnable are actions done in the body.

I will supply to you just one listing of many.

Re 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Re 20:11 `And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Do you know of any babies who are born into the world already guilty of these things they have never done? BTW, there is no passage in the KJ that says a name was ever added in the book of life, but there are several that says names already there can be and are blotted out.

I will give you another list because I am in a good mood.

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

The unrighteous are sinners. Sinners are those who do deed of sins in the body. Do you know any infants who are guilty of any of these sins listed above? If they have not committed any sins in the body with knowledge and forethought, then they are not unrighteous and they are not condemned.

 

[AustinC]

I am wise enough to know that was what you were getting at. You insist that your God, who is not my God, condemns the innocents. Whether they are sinners makes no difference to you. Yet all sins that are listed as damnable are actions done in the body.

I will supply to you just one listing of many.

Re 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Re 20:11 `And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Do you know of any babies who are born into the world already guilty of these things they have never done? BTW, there is no passage in the KJ that says a name was ever added in the book of life, but there are several that says names already there can be and are blotted out.

I will give you another list because I am in a good mood.

9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

The unrighteous are sinners. Sinners are those who do deed of sins in the body. Do you know any infants who are guilty of any of these sins listed above? If they have not committed any sins in the body with knowledge and forethought, then they are not unrighteous and they are not condemned.

So there is no difference and you know it. But, you're going to keep teaching it anyway.

I don't insist that God condemns the innocent. There are no innocent people. I insist that God pours out his mercy and grace upon corrupt people, according to his will.

When Adam sinned his image was corrupted and that corrupt image was copied down from the original (think xerox copy).

*Romans 5:12-21*
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Finally, you openly said I don't worship the same God as you do. I hope you realize that is against BB rules.

 

[JD731]

So there is no difference and you know it. But, you're going to keep teaching it anyway.

I don't insist that God condemns the innocent. There are no innocent people. I insist that God pours out his mercy and grace upon corrupt people, according to his will.

When Adam sinned his image was corrupted and that corrupt image was copied down from the original (think xerox copy).

*Romans 5:12-21*
Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Finally, you openly said I don't worship the same God as you do. I hope you realize that is against BB rules.

If a person is not guilty of committing a sin against God then he is not guilty of sin and he is not condemned to pay the penalty of it, which is eternal separation from God in the lake of fire. Sin is an act of disobeying God with an action done in the body. Thinking about doing it is not the sin. Since Adam and Eve appeared at the tree at the same time and for the same reason, it makes sense that they discussed eating of the fruit beforehand. Sin was not counted until the fruit was eaten. They were innocent until then. Sin was not imputed to them until they ate of the tree. They were not compelled by God to eat the fruit of the tree. This was their own choice. God allowed a test for them but he did not make it a temptation. The Serpent made it a temptation.

Likewise, children are born into the world in innocence. They have not committed any sin. It is not a sin to be born. Children has sin imputed to them when they can reason and understand the difference between right and wrong and when they can choose the evil over the good with knowledge and forethought. Until then they are innocent though they be naturally born and without the Spirit of God to give them power over sin.

Finally, you openly said I don't worship the same God as you do. I hope you realize that is against BB rules

Would you say the character of God is presented as the same between us in the purpose of creation? Did God in eternity past choose a few to save and take to heaven. Was that not the implication of your question concerning morality? If you teach that, then I do not believe that is a proper representation of the God I read about in scripture. This would mean that God created the vast majority for the express purpose of sending them to hell without any mercy, grace, nor hope of salvation. The cross of Christ, where God dealt with the sin problem for humanity, would have no advocacy for these.

This is a fundamental difference between us in who God is and what he is like. Wouldn't you agree?

Jas 1:12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.
13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.
17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

James is saying there must be intelligent reasoning for sin or salvation to take place.

You insist that your God, who is not my God, condemns the innocents.

Finally, you openly said I don't worship the same God as you do. I hope you realize that is against BB rules

I did not say anything about worship. I am in the context of explaining God. I do not explain his person as you explain him. That is just a fact.

 

[AustinC]

If a person is not guilty of committing a sin against God then he is not guilty of sin and he is not condemned to pay the penalty of it, which is eternal separation from God in the lake of fire. Sin is an act of disobeying God with an action done in the body. Thinking about doing it is not the sin. Since Adam and Eve appeared at the tree at the same time and for the same reason, it makes sense that they discussed eating of the fruit beforehand. Sin was not counted until the fruit was eaten. They were innocent until then. Sin was not imputed to them until they ate of the tree. They were not compelled by God to eat the fruit of the tree. This was their own choice. God allowed a test for them but he did not make it a temptation. The Serpent made it a temptation.

Likewise, children are born into the world in innocence. They have not committed any sin. It is not a sin to be born. Children has sin imputed to them when they can reason and understand the difference between right and wrong and when they can choose the evil over the good with knowledge and forethought. Until then they are innocent though they be naturally born and without the Spirit of God to give them power over sin.




Would you say the character of God is presented as the same between us in the purpose of creation? Did God in eternity past choose a few to save and take to heaven. Was that not the implication of your question concerning morality? If you teach that, then I do not believe that is a proper representation of the God I read about in scripture. This would mean that God created the vast majority for the express purpose of sending them to hell without any mercy, grace, nor hope of salvation. The cross of Christ, where God dealt with the sin problem for humanity, would have no advocacy for these.

This is a fundamental difference between us in who God is and what he is like. Wouldn't you agree?

Jas 1:12 Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.
13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.
17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

James is saying there must be intelligent reasoning for sin or salvation to take place.




I did not say anything about worship. I am in the context of explaining God. I do not explain his person as you explain him. That is just a fact.

You are openly disagreeing with God and what he tells us in Romans 5:12-21. There, God tells us that we are all corrupted at conception because we are a copy of Adam as a sinner. We are born in sin, just as David tells us in Psalm 51:5.

JD, you are making the same argument that Pelagius made. Are you aware of that? Are you aware that your position has been shown to be untrue in scripture? You literally have stated a theological position that Orthodox Christianity has condemned over a millennium before. Will you continue to double down on a theology that traditional Christianity does not hold?

 

[JD731]

You are openly disagreeing with God and what he tells us in Romans 5:12-21. There, God tells us that we are all corrupted at conception because we are a copy of Adam as a sinner. We are born in sin, just as David tells us in Psalm 51:5.

JD, you are making the same argument that Pelagius made. Are you aware of that? Are you aware that your position has been shown to be untrue in scripture? You literally have stated a theological position that Orthodox Christianity has condemned over a millennium before. Will you continue to double down on a theology that traditional Christianity does not hold?

Romans 5:12 - 21 does not say we are a copy of Adam. We are individuals with our own personalities. In those verses we are told the reason we all sin and we are given the way God has provided all of Adam's race to overcome the penalty of our sins. You provided no logical and spiritual and textual argument from the text to affirm your statements. You are merely presenting what you have been told by men who do not know what they are talking about.

Those who are "in Adam" do not have his same sin and it is plainly stated in the text you referenced. To be in Adam means to be in his family. He is the head of the race and his offspring will have his same image. I have shown on these boards over and over, hundreds of times, that the image of Adam is to be a bi-partite creature. We are soul, the spiritual nature of man, indwelling a body, the physical part of man. The soul is eternal but the body is not. THe soul came from God but the body came from Adam. It is corruptible.

Ro 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

In other words, no one after Adam ever was a sinner, and died because of it, because they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The fix for all of Adam's family is to be born into the Family of Jesus Christ. All may be received into this family by receiving the gift that will put them into the family of Jesus Christ and give them his image, which is soul, body, and his Spirit. His Spirit is what the gift is. The Spirit is the power of an endless life, because he is the life of God. He is the righteousness that is required to be saved. Those who are "in Christ" are sons of God, not sons of Adam.

This is as far as I am taking this in this post but the verses you quoted are filled with typology, which you obviously know nothing about. The contrasting types are between Adam, the natural man and Jesus Christ our Lord, the spiritual man. I think there are 5 (five) "as' and 'so" verses in this one section. That is the most simple form of types in the scriptures. A figure, like in Ro 5:14 is a type. Adam is the figure of Jesus Christ our Lord in that verse.

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ)
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

If you miss the fact that God is putting forth Adam as the figure of Jesus Christ, there is zero chance that you will follow the logic of the verses and the result will be you will settle for the best human reasoning your teachers can supply, who knows no more than you about the text.

I am trying to help you but so far you cannot be helped.

Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

 

[AustinC]

Romans 5:12 - 21 does not say we are a copy of Adam. We are individuals with our own personalities. In those verses we are told the reason we all sin and we are given the way God has provided all of Adam's race to overcome the penalty of our sins. You provided no logical and spiritual and textual argument from the text to affirm your statements. You are merely presenting what you have been told by men who do not know what they are talking about.

Those who are "in Adam" do not have his same sin and it is plainly stated in the text you referenced. To be in Adam means to be in his family. He is the head of the race and his offspring will have his same image. I have shown on these boards over and over, hundreds of times, that the image of Adam is to be a bi-partite creature. We are soul, the spiritual nature of man, indwelling a body, the physical part of man. The soul is eternal but the body is not. THe soul came from God but the body came from Adam. It is corruptible.

Ro 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

In other words, no one after Adam ever was a sinner, and died because of it, because they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

The fix for all of Adam's family is to be born into the Family of Jesus Christ. All may be received into this family by receiving the gift that will put them into the family of Jesus Christ and give them his image, which is soul, body, and his Spirit. His Spirit is what the gift is. The Spirit is the power of an endless life, because he is the life of God. He is the righteousness that is required to be saved. Those who are "in Christ" are sons of God, not sons of Adam.

This is as far as I am taking this in this post but the verses you quoted are filled with typology, which you obviously know nothing about. The contrasting types are between Adam, the natural man and Jesus Christ our Lord, the spiritual man. I think there are 5 (five) "as' and 'so" verses in this one section. That is the most simple form of types in the scriptures. A figure, like in Ro 5:14 is a type. Adam is the figure of Jesus Christ our Lord in that verse.

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
17 For if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ)
18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
19 For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

If you miss the fact that God is putting forth Adam as the figure of Jesus Christ, there is zero chance that you will follow the logic of the verses and the result will be you will settle for the best human reasoning your teachers can supply, who knows no more than you about the text.

I am trying to help you but so far you cannot be helped.

Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

You are not trying to help. You are attempting to dispute against orthodox Christian theology that has been firmly established since Augustine and Pelagius had this conversation. Hint, your guy lost the argument.
It is clear you don't understand that the corruption of sin at the fall is in every human and the curse ensures death. If it were not so, no perfect child would die in the womb, or they would die as another form of Christ, sinless and perfect. But, Romans 5 tells you this isn't true. Psalm 51 tells you this isn't true.
You have a position not taught by the Christian church.

 

[JD731]

You are not trying to help. You are attempting to dispute against orthodox Christian theology that has been firmly established since Augustine and Pelagius had this conversation. Hint, your guy lost the argument.
It is clear you don't understand that the corruption of sin at the fall is in every human and the curse ensures death. If it were not so, no perfect child would die in the womb, or they would die as another form of Christ, sinless and perfect. But, Romans 5 tells you this isn't true. Psalm 51 tells you this isn't true.
You have a position not taught by the Christian church.

Who says it is orthodox Christianity? Your crowd? Those who believes what you believe? Your points cannot be proven by the words in the text.

Psalm 51 is not a good place for you to prove your points though you have not tried. You have only mentioned the psalm.

The mother in Psalm 51 is the one who has sin, not the child. This does damage to the doctrine of an immaculate conception. Children can be brought into the world through a woman who has sin in her and not be tainted with it. The child receives the body from the woman but the spirit (the soul) comes from God. Here is proof;

Eccl 12:1 Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them;
2 While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened, nor the clouds return after the rain:
3 In the day when the keepers of the house shall tremble, and the strong men shall bow themselves, and the grinders cease because they are few, and those that look out of the windows be darkened,
4 And the doors shall be shut in the streets, when the sound of the grinding is low, and he shall rise up at the voice of the bird, and all the daughters of musick shall be brought low;
5 Also when they shall be afraid of [that which is] high, and fears [shall be] in the way, and the almond tree shall flourish, and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire shall fail: because man goeth to his long home, and the mourners go about the streets:
6 Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern.
7 Then shall the dust (the body) return to the earth as it was: and the spirit (the soul) shall return unto God who gave it.

What will you do about verse 8 where there are broken bones? Neither David nor Jesus Christ had broken bones.

Ps 51:8 Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice.

The Psalms are ultimately not about David but about David as a type. The Psalms are about our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[AustinC]

Who says it is orthodox Christianity? Your crowd? Those who believes what you believe? Your points cannot be proven by the words in the text.

Psalm 51 is not a good place for you to prove your points though you have not tried. You have only mentioned the psalm.

The mother in Psalm 51 is the one who has sin, not the child. This does damage to the doctrine of an immaculate conception. Children can be brought into the world through a woman who has sin in her and not be tainted with it. The child receives the body from the woman but the spirit (the soul) comes from God. Here is proof;

Eccl 12:1 Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth, while the evil days come not, nor the years draw nigh, when thou shalt say, I have no pleasure in them;
2 While the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars, be not darkened, nor the clouds return after the rain:
3 In the day when the keepers of the house shall tremble, and the strong men shall bow themselves, and the grinders cease because they are few, and those that look out of the windows be darkened,
4 And the doors shall be shut in the streets, when the sound of the grinding is low, and he shall rise up at the voice of the bird, and all the daughters of musick shall be brought low;
5 Also when they shall be afraid of [that which is] high, and fears [shall be] in the way, and the almond tree shall flourish, and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire shall fail: because man goeth to his long home, and the mourners go about the streets:
6 Or ever the silver cord be loosed, or the golden bowl be broken, or the pitcher be broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern.
7 Then shall the dust (the body) return to the earth as it was: and the spirit (the soul) shall return unto God who gave it.

What will you do about verse 7 where there are broken bones? Neither David nor Jesus Christ had broken bones.

Ps 51:8 Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice.

The Psalms are ultimately not about David but about David as a type. The Psalms are about our Lord Jesus Christ.

The entire church, from Augustine onward, at the Council of Ephesus in 431AD. That's who says it's wrong. You are fighting against all of Christianity with your view of innocence in children.

 

[JD731]

The entire church, from Augustine onward, at the Council of Ephesus in 431AD. That's who says it's wrong. You are fighting against all of Christianity with your view of innocence in children.

Augustine was a heretic. He is noted as the father of the RCC.

 

[AustinC]

Augustine was a heretic. He is noted as the father of the RCC.

The entire orthodox, traditional Christian community agrees with Augustine. The entire Bible agrees with Augustine because Augustine read it in the Bible.

But, here you are telling me and all of Christianity that we are all wrong and only followers of Pelagian thought are correct.

I'll let you stew on that one.

 

[JD731]

The entire orthodox, traditional Christian community agrees with Augustine. The entire Bible agrees with Augustine because Augustine read it in the Bible.

But, here you are telling me and all of Christianity that we are all wrong and only followers of Pelagian thought are correct.

I'll let you stew on that one.

Good grief fellow. The RCC is not orthodoxy and neither is Augustine, the father of the church according to the RCC.


From the internet.
Was Augustine a Roman Catholic?

Augustine is recognized as a saint in the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Anglican Communion. He is also a preeminent Catholic Doctor of the Church and the patron of the Augustinians.

You can fool yourself on this point but you cannot fool me.

 

[37818]

Augustine believed the soul to be immortal. Which is commonly wrongly believed to be orthodox. Ezekiel 18:4. Matthew 10:28.

 

[JD731]

Augustine believed the soul to be immortal. Which is commonly wrongly believed to be orthodox. Ezekiel 18:4. Matthew 10:28.

Thanks 37818, you were able to find something Augustine was right about.

 

[37818]

Thanks 37818, you were able to find something Augustine was right about.

LOL. I presume you are serious. Nowhere in the written word of God is it taught the soul is immortal.
Bear in mind, that also, nowhere in word of God is annihilationism of the soul taught either. Only it's death.

 

[AustinC]

Good grief fellow. The RCC is not orthodoxy and neither is Augustine, the father of the church according to the RCC.


From the internet.
Was Augustine a Roman Catholic?

Augustine is recognized as a saint in the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church, and the Anglican Communion. He is also a preeminent Catholic Doctor of the Church and the patron of the Augustinians.

You can fool yourself on this point but you cannot fool me.

You are missing the point.
The point is that your position was declared heresy at the Council of Ephesus in 431AD.
At the time of the Reformation, all Reformed denominations agreed with the Council of Ephesus in this matter.
So...only the followers of a renegade and rogue monk follow what you believe. The rest of all Christianity agrees with the Council of Ephesus. You, dear fellow, hold a position that is rejected by 99.9% of the Church universal. Please let this sink in. What you believe is an unorthodox teaching that only a renegade and rogue monk taught, not what the Bible teaches.

You are openly in conflict with all of the Christian Church, yet you imagine all others to be wrong and only you to be right.

Let that sink in.

 

[JD731]

LOL. I presume you are serious. Nowhere in the written word of God is it taught the soul is immortal.
Bear in mind, that also, nowhere in word of God is annihilationism of the soul taught either. Only it's death.

The scriptures' defines death in easy to be understood words. If a man can have two deaths, and he can, and some will, that means his soul, the spiritual part of man, does not cease to be conscious because he is in the state of being dead. Think! I am not sure the word "immortal" fits in this application.

 

[JD731]

You are missing the point.
The point is that your position was declared heresy at the Council of Ephesus in 431AD.
At the time of the Reformation, all Reformed denominations agreed with the Council of Ephesus in this matter.
So...only the followers of a renegade and rogue monk follow what you believe. The rest of all Christianity agrees with the Council of Ephesus. You, dear fellow, hold a position that is rejected by 99.9% of the Church universal. Please let this sink in. What you believe is an unorthodox teaching that only a renegade and rogue monk taught, not what the Bible teaches.

You are openly in conflict with all of the Christian Church, yet you imagine all others to be wrong and only you to be right.

Let that sink in.

You have not proven to me or anyone else that you have the slightest handle on what the Bible teaches. You sure have only stated things from the studies of other men from which you have received your doctrines and because they have called it orthodox teaching, so do you. It is not.

And on another note, the majority is almost always wrong. Reformed theology derives it's doctrines from the tree from which it fell, the RCC. The fruit did not fall far from the tree.

 

[37818]

The scriptures' defines death in easy to be understood words. If a man can have two deaths, and he can, and some will, that means his soul, the spiritual part of man, does not cease to be conscious because he is in the state of being dead. Think! I am not sure the word "immortal" fits in this application.

The soul dies in the second death along with the lost's resurrected body. The dead's consciousness does not end with the death of the soul.