Are You a Calvinist or a Non-Cal?

[webdog]

Isn't the problem with all involved looking at slavery from a 19th century vantage point and not from a biblical slavery vantage point?

 

[Skandelon]

I'm thinking much of this is a difference without a distinction. We all agree that everyone does sin and does need Christ, so whether or not we define that as being guilty from birth or merely prone to sin from birth, does it really matter that much? Is not the end result the same?

The bigger issue in my mind has to do with the SOLUTION for the sin problem and its sufficiency to accomplish its intended purpose.

 

[Winman]

So man is enslaved to sin.

But you said...

You keep bouncing back and forth. Is man a slave to sin or not. I'm not speaking about before or after his first sin. I'm specifically looking at the last quote where you said "if you are enslaved to sin..." and then you also said....

Seems you keep going back and forth from one post to another.

Let me see if I have it down.

According to winman:
1. If you are enslaved to sin, you would always choose to do the very worst thing you could do.
2. Men become slaves to sin AFTER they willingly choose to sin.
3. men after they sin will always choose to do the very worst thing they can do.

It is not a contradiction whatsoever, and is easily observed.

Are you addicted to heroin? No. And right now you can easily choose never to take heroin because you are not enslaved to it.

But start taking heroin for a few weeks, believeing you will not become addicted. At the very first you will have no compelling feeling to take it again, you could easily stop. But you enjoy it and believe you can control it. Then one day you do have a compelling feeling to take heroin again. Now you are becoming addicted. And in a short time you will be utterly addicted and will be unable to stop.

I remember Paul MacCartney saying just such a thing happened to him. He would snort heroin, believeing he would not become addicted this way. The first few times he was OK, he did not have the overwhelming feelings of addiction. He thought his behavior was safe and continued to snort heroin. But soon he became addicted, he had to have it. He was now a slave to it.

But even still, he recognized his problem and quit. It was difficult, but he overcame this addiction.

All sin starts out like this. You play with it and experiment with it, you are not addicted to it. But if you continue in it, you soon become addicted.

Free choice comes first, addiction follows. And this is what Jesus said, the man who sins is the servant to sin. He makes himsellf a slave.

 

[jbh28]

It is not a contradiction whatsoever, and is easily observed.

...

All sin starts out like this. You play with it and experiment with it, you are not addicted to it. But if you continue in it, you soon become addicted.

Free choice comes first, addiction follows. And this is what Jesus said, the man who sins is the servant to sin. He makes himsellf a slave.

Winman, your argument had nothing to do with the timing of us being slaves to sin, it was about being slaves to sin.

Remember, you stated...

So according to what you have stated...

1. If you are enslaved to sin, you would always choose to do the very worst thing you could do.

2. Men become slaves to sin AFTER they willingly choose to sin.

the man who sins is the servant to sin. He makes himsellf a slave.

Conclusion: men after they sin will always choose to do the very worst thing they can do.

I've gone by specifically what you have written. The problem is that when you argued that a person enslaved to sin will always be as evil as he can be is not true. I have shown a valid syllogism and come to a valid conclusion based on what you stated. The problem is that the major premise is incorrect(your statement about man always choosing the worst if he's enslaved to sin).

 

[webdog]

I'm thinking much of this is a difference without a distinction. We all agree that everyone does sin and does need Christ, so whether or not we define that as being guilty from birth or merely prone to sin from birth, does it really matter that much? Is not the end result the same?

The bigger issue in my mind has to do with the SOLUTION for the sin problem and its sufficiency to accomplish its intended purpose.

I think with much of this you are right, but we must also choose our words carefully. For instance Allan stated we are born guilty, but not a guilty sinner. Guilt is never inherited, it is a result of personal actions, and one cannot be guilty without being a sinner and vice versa.

 

[webdog]

Isn't the problem with all involved looking at slavery from a 19th century vantage point and not from a biblical slavery vantage point?

I believe both winman and jbh miss the mark when describing becoming a slave to sin. Slavery was a voluntary action similar to our modern day bankruptcy, one was not forced into it, and only remained in it until set free or a debt was repaid, (both accomplished by Christ, btw). One who sins desires sin and voluntarily makes them a slave to the point they place themselves under its care...voluntarily.

 

[Skandelon]

Sorry, guys this thread is way past its page limit, but feel free to start a new thread...