Need A True Explaination of Calvinism

[johnp.]

There are two natures in a Christian but only one nature in a natural man. Before rebirth man is spiritually dead and cannot turn to God. Rom 8:7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.
When rebirth comes our spirits are made alive. The fallen nature does not die but is dying in us and will be dying in us till kick the bucket.

As Christians mature so sin should decrease yet we will always be sinners while in the flesh. Our sinful nature is considered dead to God. He does not see it as we are clothed by Christ. Any righteous act we do is immediately spoiled by our fallen nature boosting of it. We love the law of God but we still do the opposite.

RO 7:21 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23 but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members.

john.

 

[Isaiah40:28]

There are two natures in a Christian but only one nature in a natural man. Before rebirth man is spiritually dead and cannot turn to God. Rom 8:7 the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.
When rebirth comes our spirits are made alive. The fallen nature does not die but is dying in us and will be dying in us till kick the bucket.

As Christians mature so sin should decrease yet we will always be sinners while in the flesh. Our sinful nature is considered dead to God. He does not see it as we are clothed by Christ. Any righteous act we do is immediately spoiled by our fallen nature boosting of it. We love the law of God but we still do the opposite.

RO 7:21 So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God's law; 23 but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members.

john.

So what do you think Paul is saying in Romans 7:9 about "I once was alive apart from the law..."?

 

[npetreley]

So what do you think Paul is saying in Romans 7:9 about "I once was alive apart from the law..."?

I think he's talking about his illusion that he had life by the law. Look at what he realized when he "woke up":

10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death.

You see a lot of this sort of thing in the Gospels, too.

10 Now it happened, as Jesus sat at the table in the house, that behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Him and His disciples. 11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to His disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
12 When Jesus heard that, He said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. 13 But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

Now, is Jesus really calling the Pharisees "righteous"? I don't think so. But the Pharisees were convinced they were righteous, which is why "For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance." makes sense in that context.

 

[Isaiah40:28]

I think he's talking about his illusion that he had life by the law. Look at what he realized when he "woke up":

10 I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death.

You see a lot of this sort of thing in the Gospels, too.

10 Now it happened, as Jesus sat at the table in the house, that behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Him and His disciples. 11 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to His disciples, “Why does your Teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?”
12 When Jesus heard that, He said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. 13 But go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice.’ For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.”

Now, is Jesus really calling the Pharisees "righteous"? I don't think so. But the Pharisees were convinced they were righteous, which is why "For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance." makes sense in that context.

This is the explanation that I offered as well to Webdog.
He didn't like it.
And this interpretation is from the viewpoint that Paul is speaking about his pre-conversion at this point in the chapter, right?

For whatever its worth:
One commentary I've checked, believes that Paul is writing about his experience as a new Christian, where God is speaking to him of the indwelling sin of his newly converted heart. Therefore when the commandment came to Paul with conviction, sin came to life and he died, meaning he lost all hope in his flesh.

 

[npetreley]

This is the explanation that I offered as well to Webdog.
He didn't like it.

Oh, then it must be wrong.

 

[Allan]

1)So anyone can hear(understand) the Gospel and believe it?

To whomever God reveals His truth he does so that they may understand.

Even the Calvinist agrees with this concept. Yet they state the natural or spiritually dead man though he hears the gospel and understands it, he will not respond positively to it unless his nature is changed. By this, he is judged as rejecting Jesus of their own.

Calvinism believes the lost can hear AND understand.
But they do not believe they can hear and understand in such a way as to make any salvic difference in or to that person.

Unfortunately, there isn't two different types of hearing in scripture or established in the original languages.

The Calvinst, can not deny the scriptures that state the natural man heard and knew truth (and not just the truths of God in nature but the gospel truth as well and yet turn from it to believe a lie. And AFTER THAT God gave them over to believe THE LIE -2 Thes).

There isn't two different hearing nor is there two different forms of understanding, for the natural man CAN KNOW truth according to scripture. They just can not DO (works) in ACT or DEED. This is the 'Work' of which scripture consistantly deals, as that which man can not DO. It was this understanding that was and still is consistant and prevelent in that Religious society just as it is today, about doing or working by act or deeds to show or parade your righteous works before other men at how good you are compared to others.

 

[Allan]

I think he's talking about his illusion that he had life by the law. Look at what he realized when he "woke up":



You see a lot of this sort of thing in the Gospels, too.



Now, is Jesus really calling the Pharisees "righteous"? I don't think so. But the Pharisees were convinced they were righteous, which is why "For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance." makes sense in that context.

ISAIAH:

Remember the post I wrote in which you couldn't understand me. This is what I was speaking of.

Paul THOUGHT he was alive but when God revealed the truths of what he thought he knew, THEN he died - or understood he was NOT alive.

Being in a relationship with God is where life (eternal life) is found/recieved/established.
But what IS life?
It is in THIS knowledge we can better understand the metaphor of us without God as being dead and not the literal wood meaning of dead.

Jhn 17:3 And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

The knew here is with intimate or relational knowledge (as in relationship). There is no where in scirpture that speaks of a believer coming to life twice as in becoming alive to God and then having eternal life later. Being alive to God is synonymous with being alive spiritually BECAUSE it is being alive eternally. If someone is made alive according to context, then they are at THAT moment in a right and proper relationship with God and in NO NEED to believe, for they HAVE salvation already. To better illistrate the point look over at 1 John 5

1Jo 5:20 And we know that the Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may know him that is true, and we are in him that is true, [even] in his Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God, and eternal life.

Now this by itself OUTSIDE of context would be a diffinate challange for me as it appears to substantiate your view of God giving certain people understanding to know Him that is true. However, in context of the preceding verses there is a qualifier that establishes it was not God that gave to some and not others, but is in fact glorifying God for GIVING the understanding to all that we who believed it (the truth we understood) have come to know Him that is true.

1Jo 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.
1Jo 5:11 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.
1Jo 5:12 He that hath the Son hath life; [and] he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.

See in verse 10 he that believeth.., or in the Greek - He that is in fact presently continuing to believe has in fact presently the witness in him.
and then it gives the converse, and WHY.
...he that in fact DOES NOT presently believe the wtiness of God that person in fact calls God a liar BECAUSE he in fact does not presently believe the witness or testimony of God that He (God) gave His Son.
(in case you are wondering I am expounding on the aortist, mood, and tenses of the verbs - in fact, presently, continuing...)

So you see life is about having or not having God and is not even remotely akin to not hearing, or understanding being given to certain people.
Those in the above passages have life because though God has revealed the truth of Jesus coming to man, it was THEY who believed. Look a little higher.

1Jo 5:4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, [even] our faith.
1Jo 5:5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?

John establishes for us a very important fact concerning our relationship in God and our faith toward God.
Whomever overcomes the world does so because they are born of God.
THIS is the victory that over comes the world, OUR faith.
And since the 'our' is in the plural gentive case we KNOW it is refering to the same things as - me, my, and mine. John states that it is MY faith (or personal faith) that overcomes the world. and then he tops it off the next verse - Who is it that overcomes the world, it is he that believes Jesus is the Son of God, which emphasizes the one who overcomes is born again BECAUSE he believes Jesus is the Son of God with his OWN faith. It is not his work that makes him an overcomer but his faith in Christ Jesus who OVERCAME already. If you follow this through the rest of what I have stated you will see. This actually establishes that man is not unable to believe, but man is unable to do 'works' in ACT or DEED.

EDITED IN...
Actaully if you read it first then go back and look that the texts and explanations give in reverse order it clarifies even better.

EDITTED IN AGAIN...
Let me just clarify one thing though. I do not believe a person can KNOW or understand truth apart from the illumination of the Holy Spirit, and is part of the very purpose He came...To convict the World of sin, and of righteous, and judgment to come.

 

[johnp.]

Rom 7:9 Once I was alive apart from law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died.

This is a personal experience of Paul's. Once he felt alive. There never was a time when there has been no law but especially for Paul, born a Jew and a righteous Pharisee, he was steeped in the law. And I'm sure he does not want to contradict the point that we are dead in our sins.

What are goads Isaiah? Acts 3:10 ...It is hard for you to kick against the goads.' Was Paul resisting the calling? Is this when the law was being realised by Paul, that the scriptures were 'coming to him'? He began to have ears that hear?

john.

 

[webdog]

Let's start over a bit.
You maintain that Paul says that in Romans 7:9, when he is stating that he was once alive apart from the law, he means, that he____________________.
What is Paul saying?

I think Allan and I will differ on this interpretation. To my knowledge there are two, but I could be wrong.
I think the first mistake is adding "the" before "law". The original text should state plainly "I was alive apart from nomos (law)". Why do I think this is important? The same reason as how Paul used law in Romans 5:13...

Rom 5:13 In fact, sin was in the world before [the] law (nomos), but sin is not charged to one's account when there is no law.

This can't be talking about the law given to Moses that Paul, a pharisee would follow, as there definately was sin in the world prior to Moses receiving the law, and people died spiritually. This is in reference to God's universal Law of obedience in and to Him, what Adam and Eve failed to do that resulted in death.

I believe what Paul was referring to in 7:9 was this very same fact he had just mentioned a couple chapters prior. I believe Paul was referring to the innocent state of a child (possibly his own prior to his Bar Mitzvah), as they are not yet spiritually dead. Paul was alive, not in the sense of how NT believers receive new life by grace through faith, but he had at that point not been put to death as a result of knowing God's law.

What knowledge of the law does is show us our rebellion, and stirs within us our sinful nature, bringing about more sin and spiritual death. Christ died once for all sin, even that sin commited by a child prior to dying by knowledge of God's law and statutes.

 

[Allan]

I think Allan and I will differ on this interpretation. To my knowledge there are two, but I could be wrong.
I think the first mistake is adding "the" before "law". The original text should state plainly "I was alive apart from nomos (law)". Why do I think this is important? The same reason as how Paul used law in Romans 5:13...

Rom 5:13 In fact, sin was in the world before [the] law (nomos), but sin is not charged to one's account when there is no law.

This can't be talking about the law given to Moses that Paul, a pharisee would follow, as there definately was sin in the world prior to Moses receiving the law, and people died spiritually. This is in reference to God's universal Law of obedience in and to Him, what Adam and Eve failed to do that resulted in death.

I believe what Paul was referring to in 7:9 was this very same fact he had just mentioned a couple chapters prior. I believe Paul was referring to the innocent state of a child (possibly his own prior to his Bar Mitzvah), as they are not yet spiritually dead. Paul was alive, not in the sense of how NT believers receive new life by grace through faith, but he had at that point not been put to death as a result of knowing God's law.

What knowledge of the law does is show us our rebellion, and stirs within us our sinful nature, bringing about more sin and spiritual death. Christ died once for all sin, even that sin commited by a child prior to dying by knowledge of God's law and statutes.

I agree we would disagree on that point because in the event that Paul knew he had sinned at a youth against a Holy God and needed a sacrifice, (even you contend) he is seperated from God by his own sinful action and therefore dead or seperated from God.

That is why I contend it was illusionary in his Religious self righteousness he thought he was now alive to God as being a dutiful keeper or 'work'er of the Law. It was not till the law was revealed to him as spiritual that he died from his presumptions and self-illusions.

Anyway - how do you contend him being alive after he knew his sin at some point in his youth and needed a sacrificial and atoning sacrifice that all the dutiful Jewish religious people acknowledged?

I am curious about that part because IMO that seems your weak point.

 

[johnp.]

Look a little higher.

Reaching up to touch bottom Allan? Rom 7:8 But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of covetous desire. For apart from law, sin is dead.
That is total depravity. The law wrought sin in him. That is what happens if one understands God's word. The more one understands the more power it gives sin to perform, accomplish, achieve concupiscence. desire, craving, longing, desire for what is forbidden, lust
http://www.studylight.org/desk/?l=e...=str&oq=rom%208:7&new=1&sr=1&nb=ro&ng=8&ncc=8

HEB 6:4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God...

It is possible for reprobates to understand in so far as God enlightens them. They can be standing at the very gates of Heaven but still be dropped into the pit. The more understanding they have the more they have sinned as sin takes the oppotunity afforded by law.

Out of creatures such as this you claim we can be moved to God by our own decision so I see sin taking the oppotunity.

John came to give Christ's People knowledge of their salvation and they all know it webdog.

LK 1:76 And you, my child, will be called a prophet of the Most High; for you will go on before the Lord to prepare the way for him, 77 to give his people the knowledge of salvation through the forgiveness of their sins, My sins were forgiven in a binding agreement between The Father and The Son and it had nothing to do with me. Praise the Lord.

john.

 

[Isaiah40:28]

ISAIAH:

Remember the post I wrote in which you couldn't understand me. This is what I was speaking of.

Paul THOUGHT he was alive but when God revealed the truths of what he thought he knew, THEN he died - or understood he was NOT alive.

Being in a relationship with God is where life (eternal life) is found/recieved/established.
But what IS life?
It is in THIS knowledge we can better understand the metaphor of us without God as being dead and not the literal wood meaning of dead.


The knew here is with intimate or relational knowledge (as in relationship). There is no where in scirpture that speaks of a believer coming to life twice as in becoming alive to God and then having eternal life later. Being alive to God is synonymous with being alive spiritually BECAUSE it is being alive eternally. If someone is made alive according to context, then they are at THAT moment in a right and proper relationship with God and in NO NEED to believe, for they HAVE salvation already. To better illistrate the point look over at 1 John 5

Now this by itself OUTSIDE of context would be a diffinate challange for me as it appears to substantiate your view of God giving certain people understanding to know Him that is true. However, in context of the preceding verses there is a qualifier that establishes it was not God that gave to some and not others, but is in fact glorifying God for GIVING the understanding to all that we who believed it (the truth we understood) have come to know Him that is true.

See in verse 10 he that believeth.., or in the Greek - He that is in fact presently continuing to believe has in fact presently the witness in him.
and then it gives the converse, and WHY.
...he that in fact DOES NOT presently believe the wtiness of God that person in fact calls God a liar BECAUSE he in fact does not presently believe the witness or testimony of God that He (God) gave His Son.
(in case you are wondering I am expounding on the aortist, mood, and tenses of the verbs - in fact, presently, continuing...)

So you see life is about having or not having God and is not even remotely akin to not hearing, or understanding being given to certain people.
Those in the above passages have life because though God has revealed the truth of Jesus coming to man, it was THEY who believed. Look a little higher.

John establishes for us a very important fact concerning our relationship in God and our faith toward God.
Whomever overcomes the world does so because they are born of God.
THIS is the victory that over comes the world, OUR faith.
And since the 'our' is in the plural gentive case we KNOW it is refering to the same things as - me, my, and mine. John states that it is MY faith (or personal faith) that overcomes the world. and then he tops it off the next verse - Who is it that overcomes the world, it is he that believes Jesus is the Son of God, which emphasizes the one who overcomes is born again BECAUSE he believes Jesus is the Son of God with his OWN faith. It is not his work that makes him an overcomer but his faith in Christ Jesus who OVERCAME already. If you follow this through the rest of what I have stated you will see. This actually establishes that man is not unable to believe, but man is unable to do 'works' in ACT or DEED.

EDITED IN...
Actaully if you read it first then go back and look that the texts and explanations give in reverse order it clarifies even better.

EDITTED IN AGAIN...
Let me just clarify one thing though. I do not believe a person can KNOW or understand truth apart from the illumination of the Holy Spirit, and is part of the very purpose He came...To convict the World of sin, and of righteous, and judgment to come.

I find your writing to be very confusing. I'm sure you know what you believe, but and I mean no offense, I can't make heads or tails out of what you say much of the time.
I'm not a seminary student, preacher or teacher.
I'm just a person who reads their Bible and theology books.
Please forgive my ineptness to interact with your arguments.

 

[Isaiah40:28]

To whomever God reveals His truth he does so that they may understand.

Even the Calvinist agrees with this concept. Yet they state the natural or spiritually dead man though he hears the gospel and understands it, he will not respond positively to it unless his nature is changed. By this, he is judged as rejecting Jesus of their own.

Calvinism believes the lost can hear AND understand.
But they do not believe they can hear and understand in such a way as to make any salvic difference in or to that person.

Unfortunately, there isn't two different types of hearing in scripture or established in the original languages.

The Calvinst, can not deny the scriptures that state the natural man heard and knew truth (and not just the truths of God in nature but the gospel truth as well and yet turn from it to believe a lie. And AFTER THAT God gave them over to believe THE LIE -2 Thes).

There isn't two different hearing nor is there two different forms of understanding, for the natural man CAN KNOW truth according to scripture. They just can not DO (works) in ACT or DEED. This is the 'Work' of which scripture consistantly deals, as that which man can not DO. It was this understanding that was and still is consistant and prevelent in that Religious society just as it is today, about doing or working by act or deeds to show or parade your righteous works before other men at how good you are compared to others.

Perhaps its time to start a new thread dealing with Romans 8:5-8 and 1 Cor. 2:14?

 

[Isaiah40:28]

I believe what Paul was referring to in 7:9 was this very same fact he had just mentioned a couple chapters prior. I believe Paul was referring to the innocent state of a child (possibly his own prior to his Bar Mitzvah), as they are not yet spiritually dead.

Where do you get this idea from, that children are in a state of innocence and not yet spiritually dead?

Paul was alive, not in the sense of how NT believers receive new life by grace through faith, but he had at that point not been put to death as a result of knowing God's law.

So, Paul had some spiritual life prior to knowing God's law is what you're saying and have been saying all along.

And Paul is not an exception in this, he is the normative case?

 

[webdog]

I agree we would disagree on that point because in the event that Paul knew he had sinned at a youth against a Holy God and needed a sacrifice, (even you contend) he is seperated from God by his own sinful action and therefore dead or seperated from God.

Paul would have died at the point he knew he had sinned against God. Whether that was pre or post Bar Mitvah, only he would know. I realized this at the age of 7. Some people it's 5...or 10...or 14. Even for a jew knowing what the Law was from being handed down generation to generation, doesn't necessarily mean they know it is a transgression against God. Big difference between head knowledge and heart knowledge. My niece who's 6 knows right from wrong. I even tried telling her that when she does something wrong, she is doing a wrong to God, too. Her response was "oh". She now has head knowledge of that fact, but she still hasn't put all the pieces together to digest that. I knew that disobedience to my parents was wrong as a child. I didn't know this was an offense against God that would lead to spiritual death, however.

Anyway - how do you contend him being alive after he knew his sin at some point in his youth and needed a sacrificial and atoning sacrifice that all the dutiful Jewish religious people acknowledged?

I didn't think I contended that, did I? Does knowledge of asking for forgiveness automatically mean that one knows that a transgression has been committed against God? As a child when I used to tell my parents I was sorry prior to knowing that my offense was against a Holy God, I had no idea I needed to also ask God's forgiveness.

 

[webdog]

Where do you get this idea from, that children are in a state of innocence and not yet spiritually dead?

The Bible Did you also miss Romans 5:13? What "law" or violation of God's law does a child have that leads to their sin being counted? I understand your view (Augustinian) that many hold regarding original sin. I don't agree with it.

So, Paul had some spiritual life prior to knowing God's law is what you're saying and have been saying all along.

And Paul is not an exception in this, he is the normative case?

Paul had not yet died. As was demonstrated by Adam and Eve, the moment we knowingly supercede God's commands and statutes, we die. What age this occurs may be different for everyone.

 

[Andy T.]

Webdog,

According to your theology, a nice way of escaping hell is to be an atheist. An atheist never realizes that he has transgressed against a holy God, because he doesn't believe in God in the first place. Therefore, since he has never come to have a "heart knowledge" about sinning against a God he doesn't think exists, he's home free! Same with the native who has no concept of a holy God - he's home free, too. We probably should bring back our missionaries before we give him that knowledge and possibly send him to hell.

 

[skypair]

Isaiah40, webdog,

I think what could clear this up emensely is to see that we all experience the dispensations of the revelation of God as they were presented to Adam, Abel, Noah, Abraham, Moses, John the Baptist and Jesus.

That is, we all begin innocent as Adam began though not perfect physically nor "covered" as Adam was. We all are then convicted at some point at which time our conscience "kicks in." We die spiritually when we recognize our sin against God or others.

God has given several authorities to bring us to Him -- human gov't (collective conscience), family (parental authority), the law, the visible religious kingdom and grace. All these help us to see how God causes that men be "without excuse" before God.

I think that is where webdog would be going with this conversation and I believe that Isaiah should carefully consider whether Calvin left out some of the "whole counsel of God" in constructing his paradigm.

skypair

 

[johnp.]

When a man has not heard the word of God, (Rom 2:12 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law... (And that proves that not all hear.)) He is better off than one that does hear the word of God preached. At least he is a nicer chap to know, but when a man hears the law, and I take it according to his understanding, it makes him worse than he was before in so far as his understanding goes.

When the law comes then sin taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. Rom 7:8, and that is total depravity. As soon as any understanding comes it drives one in the opposite direction to God because it is sin that reigns in a man not the man.

Rom 5:13 In fact, sin was in the world before [the] law (nomos), but sin is not charged to one's account when there is no law.

Why Sodom then webdog? How can one be wicked all the time when there is no law? GE 6:5 The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time.
No law no charges. Did all men die just cause Adam took an apple?

skypair.

God has given several authorities to bring us to Him -- human gov't (collective conscience), family (parental authority), the law, the visible religious kingdom and grace. All these help us to see how God causes that men be "without excuse" before God.

First you say that the bible reconciles us to God now you say that God is wrong when He says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:44.
It should read: "No one can come to me unless the Father and human gov't (collective conscience), family (parental authority), the law and the visible religious kingdom and grace who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day." John 6:44.

john.

 

[Isaiah40:28]

The Bible Did you also miss Romans 5:13?

Romans 5:13 tells you that children are in a state of innocence and not yet spiritually dead?

What "law" or violation of God's law does a child have that leads to their sin being counted? I understand your view (Augustinian) that many hold regarding original sin. I don't agree with it.

But you haven't shown me a better reading of Romans 5:12, 15, and 18.
Here they are again:

12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned—

You posted some Greek stuff about the word "sinned" which did nothing to improve my understanding of your point.

15But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!

Why does it say that many"DIED" by the trespass of one man?

18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.

again, why does it state that the result of one trespass was condemnation for all?

As was demonstrated by Adam and Eve, the moment we knowingly supercede God's commands and statutes, we die.

Discuss the Romans verses and we'll see if that statement can be maintained.