Faulty Theology

[Martin Marprelate]

Show us who has claimed this. The claim is that A&E were not spiritually alive before the Fall.

How come you are creating strawmen?
(Why do Calvinists CONSTANTLY do this?)

The Bible only seems to know two sorts of people: those who are 'alive unto God' and those who are 'dead in trespasses.' What I'm asking is, which were Adam and Eve?

There you go again... No one says Adam and Eve were created sinners.

Scripture says after it was all done God looked upon everything He had made and called it very good.

Gen 1:31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good.

Again, were they 'alive unto God' or 'dead in trespasses?

I don't believe anyone said Adam was going to die if he remained sinless. I believe JonC presented it as a possibility, though not a certainty. The distinction was made that if he ate of the fruit, he would "surely die". He would face certain death if he ate of it.

Well, do you think it's a possibility? And if so, how do you answer my question?

 

[Calminian]

I have told you what the Bible actually says (what is written in the text of Scripture). You have told me what you believe the Bible teaches (not "what is written" but what you believe Scripture is telling you).

I have answered repeatedly. Don't be too wise for Scripture, David. You ask what Adam was before he sinned. I told you. The Bible states that Adam was "natural man", "not spiritual man", "a living soul", "flesh", and "upright".

What does the Bible NOT say? The Bible does NOT say that Adam was created spiritual and died spiritually when he ate of the fruit. YOU say that. The Bible does not. It amazes me that you cannot see this.

Try this - type out the text of Scripture and put in bold where the Bible states that Adam was created alive in the Spirit.
Then put in bold where Scripture states that Adam spiritually died.

You cannot because it is not in Scripture. It is something your theology teaches you, and it is something upon which your theology hinges. But it is not actually in the Bible (in "what is written", much less in "what is written again").

As @Martin Marprelate clearly pointed out with his method of "Scripture interpreting Scripture", the other time the Bible uses "die, die", it is VERY clear that Scripture is speaking of death as physical (the death of the body).

This is still going on, huh? Jon, have you ever defined precisely what you mean by spiritual life and spiritual death?

 

[Yeshua1]

Heresy

Apostle Paul was inspired by God to tell us that we all spiritual died in Adam, and made Spiritually alive again in Jesus, second Adam, but JonC theology takes that away!

 

[Yeshua1]

The Bible only seems to know two sorts of people: those who are 'alive unto God' and those who are 'dead in trespasses.' What I'm asking is, which were Adam and Eve?

Again, were they 'alive unto God' or 'dead in trespasses?

Well, do you think it's a possibility? And if so, how do you answer my question?

They were before the fall spiritually alive, then died, and God provided for them a messiah to enable them to become alive again!

 

[Reformed1689]

So we are back to my assertion that Adam and Eve are a special case when it comes to discussing spiritual life.

Of COURSE they are a special case. They are the only two humans, other than Christ, created without sin. They, before the fall, are fundamentally different than all who came after.

 

[Revmitchell]

Apostle Paul was inspired by God to tell us that we all spiritual died in Adam, and made Spiritually alive again in Jesus, second Adam, but JonC theology takes that away!

Yea and its crazy. Definitely not orthodox

 

[AustinC]

Yet if Calvinists believe Adam was spiritually alive, then made to be spiritually dead, that goes against their own theology, does it not?

What "Calvinist" would teach "made to be spiritually dead?" This is your projection.

What I say is that God made Adam spiritually alive, with the capacity to disobey and thus corrupt what was created alive and holy.

When Adam disobeyed, the corruption of his nature brought about both physical and spiritual death (dying you shall die).

There was no capacity in Adam to undo what he had done. No capacity to choose redemption. Adam was at the mercy of God (which is why he hid). God, however, chose to extend redemptive grace to Adam through the promise that a Redeemer would come.

In extending grace to Adam, God brought restoration to Adam. This was a restoration Adam did not deserve, yet God chose to restore Adam anyway.

This restoration did not come without consequences to Adam and his offspring, however. We see that narrative progress from the casting out of the garden up to the present moment.

So, this argument that Adam had no spirit before the fall is an argument from silence and from what the Bible does not say. It is not an argument from what the Bible actually says.

 

[InTheLight]

What "Calvinist" would teach "made to be spiritually dead?" This is your projection.

I never said that. I said that Adam being made spiritually dead would be problematic for Calvinists.

What I say is that God made Adam spiritually alive, with the capacity to disobey and thus corrupt what was created alive and holy.

Fine. You can say that, but you can't say the Bible specifically says Adam was spiritually alive.

So, this argument that Adam had no spirit before the fall...

Is a strawman argument that no one is making.

 

[Yeshua1]

What "Calvinist" would teach "made to be spiritually dead?" This is your projection.

What I say is that God made Adam spiritually alive, with the capacity to disobey and thus corrupt what was created alive and holy.

When Adam disobeyed, the corruption of his nature brought about both physical and spiritual death (dying you shall die).

There was no capacity in Adam to undo what he had done. No capacity to choose redemption. Adam was at the mercy of God (which is why he hid). God, however, chose to extend redemptive grace to Adam through the promise that a Redeemer would come.

In extending grace to Adam, God brought restoration to Adam. This was a restoration Adam did not deserve, yet God chose to restore Adam anyway.

This restoration did not come without consequences to Adam and his offspring, however. We see that narrative progress from the casting out of the garden up to the present moment.

So, this argument that Adam had no spirit before the fall is an argument from silence and from what the Bible does not say. It is not an argument from what the Bible actually says.

"Something: in adam certainly changed when he sinned, as His relationship with God was then broken, and he needed a messiah!

 

[JonC]

Heresy

As a seminary graduate I know that you were at least exposed to the fact that the position is within orthodox Christianity because of the debate regarding Genesis 2:17.

When we elevate ourselves to the point we are comfortable calling other views "heresy" for disagreeing with our opinion, and without biblical support, then we are standing on dangerous ground.

Perhaps one day you will want to reevaluate your standard. "Heresy" should (IMHO) involve unorthodox views (which mine obviously is not unorthodox) and a denial of actual Scripture. But, that's just my view. To each their own as we answer to God individually, not in the bunch.

 

[Yeshua1]

As a seminary graduate I know that you were at least exposed to the fact that the position is within orthodox Christianity because of the debate regarding Genesis 2:17.

When we elevate ourselves to the point we are comfortable calling other views "heresy" for disagreeing with our opinion, and without biblical support, then we are standing on dangerous ground.

Perhaps one day you will want to reevaluate your standard. "Heresy" should (IMHO) involve unorthodox views (which mine obviously is not unorthodox) and a denial of actual Scripture. But, that's just my view. To each their own as we answer to God individually, not in the bunch.

I would prefer to call your theology "outside main reformed and Baptist theology"

 

[JonC]

"Something: in adam certainly changed when he sinned, as His relationship with God was then broken, and he needed a messiah!

Sure something changed in Adam:

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"—

And because of that change:

Genesis 3:23-24 therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.

 

[AustinC]

As a seminary graduate I know that you were at least exposed to the fact that the position is within orthodox Christianity because of the debate regarding Genesis 2:17.

When we elevate ourselves to the point we are comfortable calling other views "heresy" for disagreeing with our opinion, and without biblical support, then we are standing on dangerous ground.

Perhaps one day you will want to reevaluate your standard. "Heresy" should (IMHO) involve unorthodox views (which mine obviously is not unorthodox) and a denial of actual Scripture. But, that's just my view. To each their own as we answer to God individually, not in the bunch.

Jon, when the majority see your position as unsupported, your position becomes an outlier, not a standard position.

You are trying to make your position the norm. It is not the norm.

 

[Yeshua1]

Sure something changed in Adam:

Genesis 3:22 Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"—

And because of that change:

Genesis 3:23-24 therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.

More than that! Adam no longer was in a spiritual relationship with God, lost His communion, and then needed a messiah to save him!

 

[JonC]

The Bible only seems to know two sorts of people: those who are 'alive unto God' and those who are 'dead in trespasses.' What I'm asking is, which were Adam and Eve?

Again, were they 'alive unto God' or 'dead in trespasses?

Well, do you think it's a possibility? And if so, how do you answer my question?

Prior to sin this is an illogical question (this is also "begging the question" with the assumption the Bible only seems to know two sorts of people.....you are missing that Adam was created natural/ not spiritual per Scripture but also "upright").

 

[Yeshua1]

Jon, when the majority see your position as unsupported, your position becomes an outlier, not a standard position.

You are trying to make your position the norm. It is not the norm.

It is outside main reformed and Baptist viewpoints!

 

[JonC]

Jon, when the majority see your position as unsupported, your position becomes an outlier, not a standard position.

You are trying to make your position the norm. It is not the norm.

You are right and wrong. On this forum and within evangelical baptists (and Reformed doctrine) my position is an outlier. I do not deny this. It is not a standard position on this board (the Baptist Board) or within even my own denomination. BUT that does not mean it is an outlier within Christianity as a whole. It is a very orthodox position, just not YOUR orthodox position.

That is where @Revmitchell made a mistake. He used himself as the standard rather than Scripture and the Christian faith.

For example, @Martin Marprelate teaches that God separated from Jesus on the Cross. I personally hold this as a heresy (it is what I consider a blasphemy) to my standard it is within orthodox Christianity. It is a minority view but it is also a Christian view.

I came to this board to learn about other people's views and to explore my own within orthodox faith. I did not come here to preach to the choir or to change anyone to my view.

 

[JonC]

It is outside main reformed and Baptist viewpoints!

I agree. I guess I'm kinda like the Reformers in that way - I am not a very good respecter of tradition when it comes to tradition vs Scripture.

My rule is always stick to Scripture and make sure that your conclusion is within orthodox Christianity. When we are content to stick to a camp we are choosing men over God (IMHO).

 

[JonC]

This is still going on, huh? Jon, have you ever defined precisely what you mean by spiritual life and spiritual death?

Yes. Several times. One would have to be illiterate or lazy not to at least know what I mean by spiritual life and spiritual death.

 

[Yeshua1]

You are right and wrong. On this forum and within evangelical baptists (and Reformed doctrine) my position is an outlier. I do not deny this. It is not a standard position on this board (the Baptist Board) or within even my own denomination. BUT that does not mean it is an outlier within Christianity as a whole. It is a very orthodox position, just not YOUR orthodox position.

That is where @Revmitchell made a mistake. He used himself as the standard rather than Scripture and the Christian faith.

For example, @Martin Marprelate teaches that God separated from Jesus on the Cross. I personally hold this as a heresy (it is what I consider a blasphemy) to my standard it is within orthodox Christianity. It is a minority view but it is also a Christian view.

I came to this board to learn about other people's views and to explore my own within orthodox faith. I did not come here to preach to the choir or to change anyone to my view.

actually MM and I would see it more that God forsook Jesus for those 3 hours while he was the Sin bearer, as per the scriptures!
And just who would hold to that theology of your if not reformed nor Baptists?