I believe Gnostic believed all physical was bad all physical is bad.
I show the opposite, sin is spiritual, We are condemned , The physical is not bad but useful to God for redemption
-
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!
Divine Law that justifies condemning just for unjust
- Thread starter The Biblicist
- Start date
I show the opposite, sin is spiritual, We are condemned , The physical is not bad but useful to God for redemption
not really, He is a good guy, a self proclaimed Calvinist, non Calvinist that went to a non Calvinist school.
I am trying to show his errors and connect with humor.
notice the serious increases and his humor leaves when he is shown error
Depends on how one defines "world" (as it is the same Greek word used in 1 Jn 2:2). I am not advocating the position, but the existence of sin and death apart from Adam is a possibility if "world" refers to mankind rather than the cosmos or Creation.
Sin came into the world through disobedience to God's command (Romans 5:12). If the scripture could jump up and bite you on that fact it would.
Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
Still depends on how one defines "world" as to whether sin existed prior to Adam but apart from mankind. Same with death.
Not that I disagree....or agree....with your interpretation. Just that on the thread about the word "world" the obvious observance of an astute mind
is the interpretation can vary depending on that word.
Still depends on how one defines "world" as to whether sin existed prior to Adam but apart from mankind. Same with death.
Not that I disagree....or agree....with your interpretation. Just that on the thread about the word "world" the obvious observance of an astute mind
In light of the text, I just cannot see it. I do not believe in an antediluvian race. Sin is something that a person does in either thought or deed. It begins in the heart but then it often is manifest in deeds.
Louw-Nida said:
I have seen it argued that Satan was guilty of sin. If one supposes Satan's "fall" was sometime prior to Adam's "fall", and that rebellion was sin, then sin predates Adam. This does not contradict Scripture if the word "world" refers to mankind (which it can). Likewise, death could have preexisted Adam if the topic its human sin and mankind (sin entered the world of man, death spread to all mankind).
Again, I am not saying this is what I believe. But I am not sure we can approach other interpretations dismissively. At least not when we consider "all the elect" to be a possible definition of the exact same word in 1 John 2:2.
Sorry. I just do not see it. I understand what you are saying but I am dismissing it because I think it does not fit the plain normative understanding of the text. We will just have to disagree on it being a possibility.
When Scripture speaks of sin, death, and redemption it is in the context of human sin, human death, and the redemption of man.
Scripture does not tell us all dogs go to heaven because Scripture deals with the glory of God through redemptive history (of man).
Does Paul say through Adam death entered the world (creation) or the world (mankind)?
Both are possible. Since Creation was made subject to futility not through Adam's transgression but by God, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God, a case can legitimately be made that "world" in that verse speaks of mankind.
Whether we want to acknowledge it as a legitimate view based on that text is another matter entirely. Life is most simple in the choir, a bit more complicated on the highways.
Well, scripture (the text) is my final arbiter.
Yes. Scripture is the final authority. And Scripture is consistent.
Personally I think here sin entered the world and death through sin has to mean "mankind" because shortly afterwards in Chapter 8 Paul explains a different cause in reference to Creation.
Likewise, I believe God reconciling the "world" to Himself through Christ refers to "mankind" (not dogs and cats, or the cosmos, or Creation). Mostly because the explanation of God not counting man's sin against him. But partly because of Paul's explanation in Romans 8.
We disagree, and that is fine.
If "world" here does mean "all creation" and animals die because of man's sin rather than God's subjection, you are still not excluding man.
From an academic standpoint I believe it flawed. But from a practical standpoint I do not know it matters.
@JonC Interesting quote I found in an old textbook.
"But where did the soul come from? A few thinkers maintained the Origenist theory, created by God, the soul pre-existed the body to which it was assigned as a penalty for its sins. Didymus the Blind, for example, taught along these lines, as did the followers of the Spanish heretic Priscillian (+ 385). Victorinus seems to have held a variation of the same doctrine. Most of the Greek fathers, however, rejected this view, which was to be formally condemned in the sixth century. Augustine, too, reacted against the pessimistic valuation of the material order and the suggestion that the body serves as a prison for the soul which it implies. The prevalent Greek theory was creationism, i.e. that each individual soul was created independently by God at the moment of its infusion into the body. Western writers like Hilary, Ambrose and Jerome shared it, teaching that the soul was spiritual and immortal, being extended through the whole body, although existing particularly in a special part of it. Pelagius and his disciples, it need hardly be said, accepted creationism, which harmonized well with the general position." ~ Early Christian Doctrines, J.N.D. Kelly, p. 344-345, Harper One, 1978
The bolded part is something Joseph Smith found appealing when he concocted his blasphemous movement.
"But where did the soul come from? A few thinkers maintained the Origenist theory, created by God, the soul pre-existed the body to which it was assigned as a penalty for its sins. Didymus the Blind, for example, taught along these lines, as did the followers of the Spanish heretic Priscillian (+ 385). Victorinus seems to have held a variation of the same doctrine. Most of the Greek fathers, however, rejected this view, which was to be formally condemned in the sixth century. Augustine, too, reacted against the pessimistic valuation of the material order and the suggestion that the body serves as a prison for the soul which it implies. The prevalent Greek theory was creationism, i.e. that each individual soul was created independently by God at the moment of its infusion into the body. Western writers like Hilary, Ambrose and Jerome shared it, teaching that the soul was spiritual and immortal, being extended through the whole body, although existing particularly in a special part of it. Pelagius and his disciples, it need hardly be said, accepted creationism, which harmonized well with the general position." ~ Early Christian Doctrines, J.N.D. Kelly, p. 344-345, Harper One, 1978
The bolded part is something Joseph Smith found appealing when he concocted his blasphemous movement.
It is interesting to explore what others have thought. This is a theme I've seen in Christian fiction, but as a doctrine I think it is beyond orthodox Christian belief.
My view that you are mistaking about "world" in Romans 5 has nothing to do with the idea of a pre-existing soul. It has to do with Paul's explanation in Romans 8 as to why Creation is subject to futility and that reconciliation of the world in 2 Corinthians 5.
Giving that Paul attributes the futility of Creation to God rather than Adam's sin, I think it reasonable to hold that Creation was subjected to futility by God rather than through Adam's sin. So I think it at least somewhat reasonable to believe that through sin death spread to mankind rather than to all of creation.
This is why I am less defensive about interpreting "world" in Romans 5 as "mankind". The context can legitimately hold that interpretation of the word.
The context makes it clear. First, whatever it means, sin first made its entrance into it due to Adam's sin. So, it was a sphere where Adam existed and the rest of mankind existed because sin and death originated with Adam with regard to all the rest of mankind. Since the rest of the context is referring to the sphere where the first and second Adam existed and performed their headship functions it must be referring to the world of mankind AFTER the creation of the first Adam and the sphere of existence in which Adam lived.
Therefore, it cannot possibly be referring to the heavenly regions (earths atmosphere, star region or third heaven) as that is not where man exist and sin entered the heavenly regions due to Satan's sin and since Satan and angels are "spirits" they experienced spiritual death or spiritual separation from God which resulted in the very same sin nature (no spiritual life, no spiritual light, no love for God, no holiness).
This is exactly why the Lord Jesus Christ alone is qualified to be the mediator and surety of God's elect. It can be no other way.
Yes agreed. People neglect the teaching of the Lord Jesus as mediator and surety. Lol I had just posted it before scrolling down.Thank you, @The Biblicist Absolutely correct!
Just one additional point. In Hebrews 7:22, Christ is described as the 'Surety' or 'Guarantor' of the New Covenant..
A surety is someone who promises to pay the debts of someone if that person is unable to pay. Hence, 'When we were helpless [deep in debt to God for our sins and unable to pay] in due time Christ died for then ungodly' (Romans 5:6). There are several warnings in Proverbs (eg. 6:1-5) against becoming a surety for someone, since the law will then proceed against you as if you yourself were the debtor. But Christ, the sinless one, has taken all our sins upon Himself and paid the debt for them in full as if they were His own.
One additional point. It is not restricted within human nature but man's sin also affected his enviornment and the realm over which he was created to rule over. The curse upon the earth, so that thistles and thorns originated is also due to the "curse" of sin due to one man. Man's realm over which he was to rule is cursed due to his sin. Paul's point is that Adam is the focal point for the origin of sin and death into the world over which man was to rule and live in. So, the curse of sin is not limited to humanity but to the whole sphere over which he was designed to rule and the Second Adam will rule over the same sphere and his death will do away with this curse over the whole realm he rules over.