Hey!! You with a Calvinist quiz - I wanna do it!

And I will have to shake my head at yer willingness to take the blame for other peoples' sins - can I shovel a few off on you? Im running a little high this week

The Bible clearly states - NO one is responsible for the sins of another

Ezekiel 18:2-20 - and really read the 20

Let's see oh yeah

Deut 24:16 - 2Kings 14:6 quotes it and 2Chron 25:4
Jeremiah 31:29-30
Gal 6:5-8
and to a lesser degree
Jer 17:10

but you may counter with Ex 20:5 and Deut 5:9 and I would counter that is not the actual sin held against them - but the consequences of that sin.

A child of an alcoholic will grow up thinking that being an alcoholic is normal - the deeds that our fathers do - influence us. However we are NOT held responsible for them.

The Bible goes on and on about how we have to give an account - because it is not Adam's sin that convicts us - it is our own!

 

Ok ok I shouldnt have used the word impossible - its just extremely extremely unlikely that man wont sin

Enoch has always interested me in that regards - but thats another topic

I though I answered this question already

"if I dont take Adam's sin - how can I take Christ's righteousness?"

The answer again I take not the sin but the consequences - I take not Christ's righteousness - but the consequences

I get given sin by Adam as a bonus gift - ONCE i claim the consequences - Through Christ I get given His righteousness once I claim the consequences.

Is any man Christian or heathen - righteous?

The answer is no - Christ is

 

Sigh misrepresenting me again aren't you

Did I say fallen man could do good?

No I did not I said fallen man had the possibility however extremely remote of NOT sinning

A little difference there

but since you want a yes/no answer then in theory the answer is yes - it is possible - the reality is no - no one's done it save Jesus.

But I'll stand by the yes tho the Baptists howl, and the Pentecostals holy laugh

Plus joseph you just called me a name a label rather then dealing with my points concerning how the son is NOT responsible for the sin(s) of the father or vice versa

That is Biblical truth and principle - but yet we throw Adam's sin around. Its not mine - Ive screwed up on my own thank you very much - thanx to what Adam did give us (a sin nature) - I'm not a Messiah to start taking other people's sins for them. Nor would I be foolish enough to claim that I can.


The following is sarcasm - intended to point out the foolishness of taking another persons sin.

"Come to me all ye who are lightly burdened and I can take your sins - but you heavy burdened guys well... Im not so sure I want your sins. "

The sarcasm is now over

Only GOD can take another man's sins and I'm not about to go around saying I am, can, have or any other such nonsense.

 

This post for GinaL

Ok yer summations of my points

1. Technically the answer is yes that statement is correct - but only because God is gracious in regards to those who have not sinned and takes them into heaven - When we are born we are imperfect and thus not worthy of heaven but we are not guilty of sin and thus justified for hell - But it is only a matter of time before we will sin and thus earn hell - a smart one year old child could in theory be in Hell - I WONT GET INTO THE AGE OF ACCOUNTABILITY here - other then to say that I believe it exists

2. I was using the word stupid as a pejorative the word stupid is perhaps an inaccurate one in and of itself - but yes Man has a choice to sin or not sin - but because of the sin nature inherited from Adam (- NOT THE SIN - which no one has yet dealt with the verses I posted - just said I was Pelagian ie heretic and ignored the hole in their own theology/logic/belief) man will in fact sin

3. Again stupid is being used as a pejorative and may not necessarily be the most accurate term. However here your representation of my view is flawed - No motivation born of man or spirit save that which comes from God Himself can enable man to do good. Again at best men can avoid doing evil

4. Not quite right - The first phrase is correct - the second phrase isn't. Mankind doesnt necessarily LIKE sin - it is because of the law of sin or sin nature that wars within our members that Adam because of his sin put us under - mankind will almost 99.9999999999 percent sure he will sin given the opportunity.

5. I see you again latched on certain words while not grasping the concept behind them. There is a school of thought that Adam sinned in order to obey God's command to be fruitful and multiply - its a silly school of thought - but I was trying to inject what some people might consider humour into otherwise is often a dull and semantic-stretching verbal dance.

But to get back to the point phrase number 5 is a rehash of number one but using the opposite - In actuality IF there existed a place known as Purgatory AND IM NOT SAYING THERE IS! That's where they would go when if they are born they died immediately. However God in His Mercy and Justice - seeing that while they are not perfect having a sin nature but that they are not guilty having not sinned graciously and sovereignly chooses to allow the "innocent" into Heaven.

 

You want Pelagianism and you want to call my theology Pelagianism - THEN GET IT RIGHT!

Here is a summary of Pelagianist thought

1. That Adam would have died even if he had not sin;

I disagree - but am willing to change my mind on this point should proof be brought to bear.

2. That the sin of Adam injured himself alone, not the human race;

I thoroughly disagree - His sin corrupted all of humanity

3. That newborn children are in the same condition as Adam was before the Fall; corollary; that infants, though unbaptized, have eternal life;

Nope newborns are corrupt - but not guilty of sin - thus it is by God's sole grace they are allowed into Heaven - or it is possible that God uses some other means of judgement unknown to man to judge them and thus send them to Hell or Heaven because of that.

4. That the whole human race does not die because of Adam's death or sin, nor will it rise again because of Christ's resurrection;

This is sooooo wrong

5. That the Old Testament Law, as well as the New Testament Gospel, gives entrance to heaven; and

Nope without the acknowledgment of Christ - no getting into heaven - even sinless

6. That even before the coming of Christ there were men who were entirely without sin.

I dont know - maybe Enoch - but i really really doubt any man before or after Christ was, is, or will be entirely without sin.


So I am not Pelagianist - but then you fall back and cry semi-Pelagianist SEMI SEMI!!!!!

This is a poor defense but to satisfy you here we go

Semi-Pelagianist thought

1. According to semi-Pelagianism, man doesn’t have a complete capacity, but man and God could cooperate to a certain degree in this salvation effort: man can (unaided by grace) make the first move toward God, and God then completes the salvation process.

I disagree wholeheartedly man cannot be saved or make any motion theretowards without God authoring, and completing the process. People confuse response to the regenerative call as Semi-Pelagianism but in fact Semi-Pelagianism has man as the initiator which he is not and can never be.

2. the gratuity of grace is to be maintained against Pelagius in so far as every strictly natural merit is excluded; this, however, does not prevent nature and its works from having a certain claim to grace;

Grace claimed by works? Nope that aint true and I aint having none of that

3. as regards final perseverance in particular, it must not be regarded as a special gift of grace, since the justified man may of his own strength persevere to the end;

Ha ha ha ha ha ha We can no more persevere without divine help then we could initiate the process of salvation - In simple words - Man cannot persevere under his own strength to the end

4. On the right hand, Augustinianism completed in Calvinism. On the left hand, Pelagianism completed in Socinianism. And Arminianism comes between these as the system of compromises and is developed from Semipelagianism.

Im not an Arminian they have mistakes too

5. God desires to save all people, and the propitiation of Christ's atonement is available to all.

Oh God have mercy on me! - I agree on this point that must make me a full blown Pelagianist oh wait sorry only a full blown Semi-Pelagianist

6. Predestination is based on divine foreknowledge.

This is both correct and false - It would take a while to explain.

Ok this makes me a 1 or 2 point Pelagianist - and I'm a 1 or two point Calvinist as well

Sticking Labels on people rather then dealing with their points is low and cheapens you, and your opposite number, and can cause harm and violence to the souls of fellow believers.