I read where Romans 3:23 means that all sinned at one point in time past...The fall. you quoted 5:14, yes, we were not Adam, but we sinned in Him.
-
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!
Is the Doctrine of Original Sin Biblical?
- Thread starter JesusFan
- Start date
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
So f it was an actual salvation that everyone is saved, is that what you believe?
But since I do not think actually believe that then you have to think God was lying to us.
1Ti 2:3 This is good and pleasing in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who wants everyone to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him.
1Ti 4:10 To this end we labor and strive, because we have set our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of everyone, and especially of those who believe.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1Ti 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom for all—the testimony that was given at just the right time.
Now I will want for your twisting of these clear verses so that they fit your man-made theology.
As I said only those that believe in the risen Christ will be saved so we agree.
Where you drift from scripture is when you make that wrong assumption that people were saved at the cross. Paul was clear [1Co_15:17] that it is through the risen Christ that we are saved so you either believe the bible or you believe what some man has told you. The choice is yours.
So what are you trying to say?
1Jn 2:2 He Himself is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.
So who was Christ the atoning sacrifice for even leaving out the words "the sins of"?
Leaving those words out does not change who Christ was the propitiation for, "our" sins & "the whole world" sins.
I can understand that you want to defend your theological view but you should trust what the bible actually says and not what some group of men tell you it says.
You do not need to believe what I or any other man says about the bible but you had better believe what God has said in His bible.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
I had to look that up, is this what you believe?
Double predestination is the idea that not only does God choose some to be saved, He also creates some people who will be damned.
If you do then I have to ask why the cross?
Also you have just made God worse than Satan. While Satan tries to trick people into following him and thus going to hell. God actively sends people to hell before they have done any wrong.
Double predestination fails to account for the fact that God desires all to be saved (1Ti_2:4) and commands His creation to repent (Act_17:30). Obviously, it would be illogical for God to desire everyone to be saved and command all people to repent if He had already divinely determined their destiny based on His eternal decree.
The fact that double predestination calls into question the biblical character of God should give you pause. But I doubt that it will.
This I find amazing.
There are 6 audios consisting apparently of 14 chapters telling us what God tells us in one verse consisting of eight Greek words.
I am not at all saying Pink is wrong (or right, for that matter). I just find it interesting that anybody would read Romans 8:8 and think "well, we need a theologian to explain this one to us".... much less a theologian who would read the verse and think "wow....this is going to take 14 chapters to explain".
I wonder why we feel a need to make something simple and straightforward into something complicated.
Alan Dale Gross
Active Member
If man is sinful, then he is not God, which I am not, for example.
That's why I don't dive into rewriting entire passages as if they are mine to do with as I please. But, it is God, after all, Who does what He Pleases with that which is His, right?
(Good in what sense? Better than bad, by giving your kid a stone when they asked for bread, or 'Good' in a Spiritually Annointed Gracious Operation of the Holy Spirit?, i.e., which has nothing to do with a lost soul choosing God. Lost man is able to recognize a snake from a candy bar, to do good in that sense is all. Big deal. Not handing your kid and obtaining the Extra More than His Natural Perfect Goodness from God the Father, by fantasizing that a lost, undone, putrifying sore of a God-hating wicked sinner worm has some desire, much less ability, to come to God is making life come from a rock.
That may be an assumption you have about it all, but the disproof is not to just assume that Eternal Life is the same as collecting Easter eggs.
God? Will be? As the result of responding to the actions of sin-cursed man?
A Much Better? Father?
I guess that's perfectly normal and perfectly natural and logical..
In a system of computing where you have "not of him that willeth" actually willing to be saved, then it would follow, I suppose, that the One and Only Perfect God the Father
might be said to be able to Will to be a much better Father than He already is...
You won't catch me trying to undermine this monumental treatment of man's Total Depravity, by using that kind of equation. It almost sounds self-contriduictory, to me.
God has Mercy on whom HE WILL HAVE MERCY.
If God is waiting on man, who will not come to Him that he might have Life, He will be waiting all throughout the Everlasting Endurance of Eternity, TO NO AVAIL.
From The FREE AGENCY OF Man by T.P. Simmons.
IV. FREE AGENCY OF THE NATURAL MAN
"Man cannot do otherwise than continue in sin so long as he is in his natural state (Jer. 17:9; Prov. 4:23; Job 14-4; Jer. 13:23; John 6:65; Rom. 8:7,8; 1 Cor. 2:14).
"But his continuance in sin is not due to outside compulsion or restraint, but to his own character which causes him to choose darkness rather than light (John 3:19).
"He continues in sin for the same reason that a hog wallows in the mire.
He continues in sin for the same reason that God continues in holiness.
Thus he is fully a free agent.
V. FREE AGENCY AND DIVINE HARDENING AND BLINDING
"In the hardening and blinding of sinners, which is unmistakably attributed to God in the Scripture (Rom. 9:18; John 12:40), there is no outside force brought to bear upon the will of the sinner.
"While God is said to blind and to harden the sinner, the sinner is said to blind and harden himself. John 12:40 is a quotation from Isa. 6:10, where the prophet Isaiah is commanded to shut the eyes of the people. Then in Matt. 13:14,15 there is another free quotation from this same prophecy, and in Matthew the sinners are said to have closed their own eyes.
"Then, still again, in 2 Cor. 4:3,4, we have the blinding of sinners attributed to the devil. All of these passages refer to the same thing, and all of them are true because they are in the Word of God. We have the blinding of sinners attributed to God, to the devil, to the prophet, and to the sinners themselves. It is ours to find, if we can, the harmony between these statements.
"Here it is: The blinding is Attributed to God because He Decreed, whether Permissively or Efficiently, all the circumstances that render the sinner blind.
"The blinding is attributed to the devil because he is the author of sin by which the sinner is blinded.
"The same blinding is attributed to the prophet because his preaching of the Word brings out and makes the blindness of the sinner active in his rejection of the Word.
"Then, finally, the blinding is attributed to the sinner himself because he loves darkness rather than light, and manifests his choice of darkness by rejecting the Word.
"This leaves the natural man a free agent.
"If God, or the devil or the prophet, by a power outside of the nature of the sinner, could compel the sinner against his choice to reject the Word, the sinner would no longer be a free agent, and he would be no longer responsible for his unbelief.
Alans Note: but, he is responsible and even condemned already.
"Responsibility and free agency go hand in hand.
"What has been said of the blinding of the sinner is also true of the hardening of the sinner. The hardening of the heart of Pharaoh is attributed to God (Rom. 9:18; Ex. 4:21; 7:3; 7:13; 9:12; 10:1,20,27; 11:10). But it is also attributed to Pharaoh himself (Ex. 8:15,32; 9.,34). The explanation is the same as for the blinding treated above.
VI. FREE AGENCY AND CONVERSION;
"Man is unable to turn from sin until he is Quickened by the Spirit of God.
Alans Note: make note of that, write that down.
"For proof of this see the passages given in proof of the fact that man cannot do otherwise than continue in sin so long as he is in his natural state. The New Nature, therefore, must be Implanted logically (and chronologically) prior to the exercise of Repentance and Faith.* This is the meaning of the New Hampshire Declaration of Faith when it says that Repentance and Faith are "Inseparable Graces Wrought in our souls by the rRegenerating Spirit of God." FIRST. This is also the teaching of Eph. 1:19,20.
But when a man turns to God in Repentance and Faith he acts voluntarily and is thus a free agent. He is not compelled to turn by a power outside of his own Nature. For, in Implanting the New Nature, the Holy Spirit Operates "in the region of the soul below consciousness" (Strong). Then that New Nature, when Implanted, becomes as much a part of the man as the old Nature was; and it Moves the will in strict conformity to the Nature, Laws, and normal action of the will. Thus man is a free agent in Conversion; and, of course, remains a free agent, although God continues to Work in him "both to Will and to Work for His Good Pleasure" (Phil. 2:13). But this Work, like the Work of Quickening, does not coerce the will."
ALANS NOTE: BEING BORN AGAIN, BY THE HOLY SPIRIT OF GOD,
GIVES THE SAVED SOUL AN ENTIRELY NEW WILL WITH WHICH TO WILL WITH
WHICH CHOOSES TO THEN TURN FROM THEIR SIN THAT THEY NOW RECOGNIZE
IS ETERNALLY OFFENSIVE TO GOD AND DESERVES ETERNAL PUNISHMENT IN HELL
AND THEN WILL TO TURN TO JESUS CHRIST IN FAITH AND BELIEF THAT WHEN JESUS DIED, HE DIED FOR THEM AND THAT WHEN HE WAS BURIED, HE BURIED THEIR SINS AWAY, AND THAT GOD ACCEPTED JESUS' PAYMENT FOR THEIR SINS.
HOW DO THEY KNOW GOD ACCEPTED JESUS' PAYMENT FOR THEM IN THEIR PLACE?
BECAUSE, WHAT HAPPENED THE THIRD DAY? SOME PEOPLE BELIEVE THAT.
DO YOU BELIEVE THAT WHEN JESUS RAISED FROM THE DEAD, GOD WAS SHOWING HIS APPROVAL FOR YOUR SOUL TO BE SAVED FOR SURE, PERSONALLY?
__________
*For fuller discussion of this see chapter on "Conversion."
__________
Alan Dale Gross
Active Member
Pink is simply, systematically teaching what God has written to Mankind,
on the subject of Total Depravity, which is taught with each of the other Doctrines of Grace in every book of the Bible.
I know what he's teaching.... read a lot of Pink.
This is what I've tried to explain to several here about Penal Substitution Theory. It all goes together.
One can't say on one hand that Penal Substitution Theory is right and on another that Calvinism - all five "points" - is wrong.
It all goes together.
If Penal Substitution Theory is right then limited atonement has to be right because God's forgiveness is based on those sins being punished on Christ (the demands of justice).
If limited atonement is right then man's efforts had absolutely nothing to do with man's salvation (this was completely God's work accomplished on the cross to save those He chose long before any of us were born).
If total depravity is right then unconditional election has to be right otherwise nobody would be saved.
If unconditional election is right then perseverance of the saints has to be right as our ultimate salvation is by God's will and not human merit or works.
If any of this is right then God's grace has to be irresistible otherwise, again, salvation would be based on works.
I'm not saying everybody who believes Penal Substitution Theory has to be a 5 point Calvinist, or that holding one point one has to hold them all.
But to have any logical consistency one does. If you take away one part the rest crumbles.