My goodness... Don't you ever talk about anything else besides the CAL vs. Armin debate? I created threads on Bibliology, and Philosophy of late and you have not joined in. I am eager to hear your views.
-
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!
OT refutation of Augustinianism
- Thread starter webdog
- Start date
convicted1
Guest
Brother Wes, you've made my point for me and didn't realize it. Adam sinned, and God drove him out of Eden. Adam messed it up for all of us. Adam broke communion with God. If Adam hadn't sinned, we'd be there to this day, imo. Jesus Christ redeemed us, His bride, and put us back in the fellowship with God that Adam had pre-fall.
Using that reasoning, since Christ died, Adams guilt spread to Him making Him a sinner.
What you are describing is the fall and the resulting curse, not the transfer of guilt from one person to another. We don't even do that in our imperfect justice system! Our guilt is always judged on what we do...so why would it be less just in Gods perfect justice system?
Exactly. And what amazes me is that in numerous places in scripture God forbid that one person should be punished for another's sins.
Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
This verse alone clearly refutes Original Sin, God said that the son shall not bear the iniquity or sin of his father, and neither shall the father bear the iniquity or sin of his son. Every man spiritually dies for his own sin.
And this passage is clearly speaking of eternal death, not temporal, as I showed before.
24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.
This passage is not speaking of civil law as some here falsely claim, it is speaking of dying lost "in sin". This verse clearly says the man that turns from righteousness and sins, that "in his trespass", "in his sin", "in them" shall he die.
The Jews were very aware that God forbid one man dying for another's crimes or sins.
2 Kin 14:6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
To believe that all men were blamed for Adam's sin in the garden and were caused to spiritually die is to believe that God himself is a hypocrite who breaks his own laws. Absurd!
Physical death could actually be seen as a blessing, it is the fear of death that is man's greatest incentive to repent of sin and trust Christ. If man could live forever as a sinner, few men would ever repent.
And scripture does show that God takes our physical weaknesses into consideration when we do wrong.
Psa 103:13 Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him.
14 For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust.
God is compassionate, he remembers that we are made of dust and very fallible, and thank God for that!
A famous verse that clearly refutes Original Sin is Romans 14:12;
Rom 14:12 So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.
We are not going to stand in front of God and worry about what our fathers have done, we have to give account only for ourselves.
Ecc 11:9 Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth; and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of thy youth, and walk in the ways of thine heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: but know thou, that for all these things God will bring thee into judgment.
It is our choices we are going to be judged for, not our father's or Adam's choices.
Gal 6:4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself alone, and not in another.
5 For every man shall bear his own burden.
The scriptures are clear, God judges every man for his own works, not those of another.
So there is an abundance of scripture that clearly refutes Original Sin. Augustine simply did not know or understand scripture very well at all.
I am not a Calvinist, but it is terrible the way that you misrepresent it, especially the doctrine of the depravity of man. I also don't believe in Total Inability, but I do believe that man has a sin nature from birth.
Every Calvinist believes that we shall all give account of ourselves before God. All of these Scriptures are moot--way off topic. They don't disprove anything, just like Psalm 139 doesn't prove anything which you finally had to admit. Praise to God has nothing to do with one's sin nature. Giving account before God, or the Judgment Seat of God has nothing to do with one's sin nature. Why do you confuse different doctrines?
It proves we are judged "sinners" for our own sin, not Adam's.
There is not one word of scripture that supports we are born with a sin nature. That is what you tried to prove with Psa 51:5, but it teaches no such thing. It is speaking about David being conceived "in sin" by his mother.
Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Does this verse say all men inherit a sin nature from Adam. NOPE.
If you don't like Cal/Arm threads, then don't stick your big nose into the middle of one. Nobody is putting a gun to your head to make you read this thread.
And you didn't start this thread, Webdog did.
Go start another thread where all you do is talk about yourself.
First, it is only your opinion that Scripture teaches that we are not born with a sin nature. Reconsider your position since more than 95% of the board disagrees with you and they all can't be wrong.
"We shall all give account of ourselves before God."
This refers to the "Judgment Seat of Christ."
First, there is no sin in heaven.
Second, now we wait for the redemption of our bodies, and at the second coming of Christ we will receive those glorified bodies at which time that sin nature will be entirely eradicated.
Third, we are not even judged for sin; we are rewarded, every man according to his works. It is not a judgment of sin.
Thus your "proof text" is silly beyond degree. It doesn't refute a thing.
There are hundreds of Scriptures (not just Psalm 51:5) that teach the depravity of man. And you cannot refute them all no matter how hard you try.
Yes, and for centuries the vast majority of mankind believed the world was flat. Don't you realize that is not a valid argument?
I (and others) have presented many scriptures that clearly argue against being born sinful and separated from God. The common objections are, "That verse doesn't mean what it says", or "You know what scripture says, but not what it means". So even people that object to my view agree that I believe what the scriptures SAY.
If the scriptures don't mean what they say then they are meaningless, and you might as well throw the book in the trash, as no one could possibly know what it means.
It means you will be judged for what you do, not what Adam did. We do not have to give account for what Adam did, but only "ourselves". Plain as day.
I agree that we will not have corruptible bodies, and it very well may be we will not be tempted by fleshly desires. But being tempted is not sin, sin is the "transgression" of the law. Sin is something you do, not something you are.
1 Jhn 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
You and others do not seem to realize that you have actually redefined what sin is. Sin is something you DO, it is something you COMMIT. You cannot be born sinful, you must actually COMMIT sin, or TRANSGRESS the law to be a sinner.
We are judged for sin in the sense that we shall suffer loss for sin.
1 Cor 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
Loss is not good, loss is a punishment.
I don't think anyone could prove anything to you. That doesn't mean my argument is not valid, you simply refuse to see it.
There are many scriptures that say man is a wicked sinner, but you cannot show any verse that says all men are born with a sinful nature.
But I can show a verse that says all men are born or made upright.
Ecc 7:29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
This verse clearly and plainly says God has made man upright. You cannot deny that, so you argue that this verse is speaking of Adam only, but the word "they" is plural and points back to the word "man" showing this verse is speaking of all mankind, not Adam alone. The word "many" refers to inventions or the sins that caused man to fall from being upright. This word "many" is also plural showing that man falls from his uprightness for many various sins, not Adam's single sin.
So, this verse clearly shows all men are made upright, and that all men fall for their own personal sins, not Adam's single sin.
Your answer will be that I pulled this verse out of context and that it really doesn't mean what it plainly says.
Pathetic.
Last edited by a moderator:
I gave you a quote how a great number of the early church fathers living before Augustine believed the sin nature was inherited. Are you still going to deny it?
As I have recently pointed out you are using totally irrelevant Scriptures that have nothing to do with Original Sin nor the depravity of man. You do this habitually.
The scriptures do mean what they say. But you make them say what they don't say, and that is the real problem.
"For we will all give account of ourselves before God."
This is speaking of the scenario described in 1Cor.3:11-15. It has nothing to do with Adam, our Adamic nature, or even sin. It has only to do with what we have done for Christ or not for Christ. Read the account.
Sin originates from a sinful nature. That is what Jesus taught. Can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit? NO! Why? It has a corrupt nature.
And only by the divine intervention of God can that nature be changed.
That is not the only definition of sin in the Bible.
"All unrighteousness is sin." (1John 5:17)
"missing the mark" is sin. (Rom.3:23)
Not attaining to the holiness of God is sin.
"To him that knows to do good and does it not" is sin (James 4:17)
However, it is a loss of reward. Some will have little reward and some will have great reward, depending on what they have done for Christ on earth.
"Therefore lay up treasure in heaven where moth and rust does not corrupt..."
It is not me. I mentioned "proof texts." They are not valid. They are mostly out of context.
I can deny that, and I have in the past. You have just proven my point. As I have said before Ecclesiastes is one of the favorite books of the cults. The scriptures are often taken out of the overall context of the author, Solomon. "Vanity of vanities" he said, "all is vanity:" the theme of the book. He looks at life from the outside, as a philosopher. He says (7:29) as a secular philosopher views life, not as God views it.
Study this book Winman that you, like the cults, do not take the Scripture out of its context. God did not make man upright. It is not speaking here of Adam. Christ said to the rich man: "Why call me good; there is none good but God." The scripture does not contradict itself, but you have Solomon contradicting Christ.
No, I told you what I believe, and you are way off the mark.
Study the book. I am not the one who is pathetic here. You need to study the book before you quote scripture from it.
I said before that the Calvinists on this forum are very eager to meet you.
http://www.thecalvinistcafe.org/forum/
You mean this?
This article does not support you as much as think, the Latin fathers believed in hereditary depravity, while the Greek fathers did not. Part of this was because the Latin fathers used a flawed Latin text that said, "in whom all sinned" in Romans 5:12 which was ASSUMED to be referring to Adam. This was complete error as nearly all scholars concede. The Greek fathers objected to both the flawed Latin translation and the interpretation this flawed text resulted in. So this is no proof at all, and if a person was truly interested in truth they would see the Greek view was more likely correct, and the Latin view was likely error.
Scripture that directly tells how God made man is absolutely relevant. You depend on Psa 51:5 which is not speaking of how God made mankind, but David's personal sin.
Right, you are the one who interprets Psa 51:5 to teach all men are born with a sin nature.
It says we give account for "ourselves". You don't believe that, you believe we are all born dead because of Adam. Ridiculous.
This is the easiest part of your argument to refute. Satan was created perfect, yet he was able to sin. The fallen angels and Adam and Eve were created very good, yet they were able to sin. This absolutely proves beyond refute that a sin nature is not necessary to sin. You couldn't be more wrong.
Those are all ACTIONS. Missing the mark is action, to him that knows to DO good and DOES it not is sin. You refute your own self.
Loss is a punishment. Have you ever paid a speeding ticket?
Solomon was telling us an observation. He had observed that God made man upright, but they had sought out many inventions or sins. It is plain as day.
See, your argument is that scripture does not mean what it says. The word "they" clearly refers to "man" and shows this verse is speaking of all men, not Adam. You cannot deny that scripture says God made man upright, so you twist and wrest the verse to mean other that what it plainly says. It could have said "Adam" but it didn't, it said "they".
Some folks never come clean.
Ecc 7:29 is still a truth. It is an observation of Solomon. He observed that God made man upright, but they seek out many inventions or sins. You can deny all you want, but Solomon believed all men are created or made upright.
Now that is a direct verse addressing man's state of being at creation or birth. It is not a verse about his mother or what she was doing when he was conceived.
And you call me unteachable?, what a laugh.
Last edited by a moderator:
Your excuse is irrelevant. I am not prone to believe it any way.
The fact is you cannot say that no one before Augustine believed in Original sin or the Depravity of man. They did. It does not matter for what reason they believed in it, they did. You may disagree with why they believed in it; BUT THEY BELIEVED IN IT! Augustine did not originate these doctrines. Many of the ECF believed them before Augustine was even born.
Admit it.
Hardly. I have hundreds of verses at my disposal compared to a very few proof text of yours which you habitually take out of context. Jer.13:23 is a good verse, but you don't like its teaching either. Jer.17:9; Rom.5:12-19; Eph.2:1-3; Rom.3:10-12; Gen.6:5; Isa.64:6, etc. There are many others.
Because it does, and so does Psalm 58:3, but you won't believe that either.
That is what Eph.2:1 says isn't it?
Here is what I said:
"For we will all give account of ourselves before God."
This is speaking of the scenario described in 1Cor.3:11-15. It has nothing to do with Adam, our Adamic nature, or even sin. It has only to do with what we have done for Christ or not for Christ. Read the account.
Again, this is a heavenly scene. We all have our glorified bodies. It has nothing to do with Adam. Why do you make the most ridiculous assumptions?
A complete non sequitor. We are not created beings. We are speaking of the Human Race. Both Adam and Satan were created. Adam is the federal head of mankind, and because of his sin we all fall under the curse, and all sin. Read Rom.5:12-19.
No they are not. They are actions of God. Are you accusing God of sin?
It is God that decides who is rewarded and who loses rewards; not man.
A speeding ticket is not a crown. It is not a reward. Do some study.
It was observation on the part of a secular philosopher. I plead with you to study the book.
He sought out happiness in pleasure, riches, women, etc., but found none. All was vanity. In that context you are quoting these scriptures. It is vanity that you do.
It is the statement of a man who is looking at life from the point of view of a secular philosopher. Until you study the book for yourself you remain unteachable.
The earliest church fathers DID NOT believe in Original Sin.
Prof. Henry Cowles said:
http://truthinheart.com/EarlyOberlinCD/CD/Doctrine/OriginalSin.htm
This was spoken of the earliest church fathers. The first ECF who really leaned toward OS was Tertullian
Prof. Henry Cowles said:
Tertullian was the first ECF to believe in Original Sin, but dozens of earlier church fathers did not hold to it.
Prof. Henry Cowles said:
So, many ECF did not agree with OS at all. Almost all of the Greek fathers disagreed with it and continued to do so.
These verses do not say man is born evil, only that he IS evil. They do not say when man became evil. But there is scripture that does tell us when man becomes evil;
Gen 8:21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
Scripture does not teach man is evil from birth, but from "youth" which means puberty, or about the time a person enters their teenage years.
But you never quote this verse, do you?
Psa 58:3 is obvious hyperbole. It also says children are poisonous as serpents, have great teeth like a lion, and melt like snails. Only a fool would form doctrine from such scripture. If you take verse 3 as literal, you must accept the rest of this Psalm literally also. Nonsense.
No, it says we were dead in trespasses and sins wherein we "walked". Newborn babies cannot walk.
You say all sorts of stuff, what is important is what scripture says, and scripture says we will give account for "ourselves" not Adam.
Baloney. Being created matters not. Satan was perfect, the angels and Adam and Eve were all very good, none of them were created with a sin nature, yet they were all able to sin. Your view is EASILY refuted. You are simply demonstrating how obstinate and stubborn you are to admit you are wrong.
What in the world are you talking about? I simply said a "loss" is a form of punishment, and it is. If you drive drunk, you will LOSE your license.
No, it's a punishment. Knock, knock, is anybody home??
Solomon was a prophet. He was also the wisest man that ever lived according to scripture.
1 Kin 4:30 And Solomon's wisdom excelled the wisdom of all the children of the east country, and all the wisdom of Egypt.
31 For he was wiser than all men; than Ethan the Ezrahite, and Heman, and Chalcol, and Darda, the sons of Mahol: and his fame was in all nations round about.
Unlike you, Solomon knew what he was talking about, and he said God made man upright, but THEY have sought out many inventions. You have to be intellectually dishonest to interpret this to be speaking of Adam only, Adam is not a "they".
Solomon wrote the scriptures under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. There is no reason not to regard this verse as a spiritual truth. He is not saying this was some sort of proverb among the people, but a personal observation. And again, Solomon was the wisest man in the world when he made this observation. In fact, his wisdom was a gift from God.
You just don't want to see the truth. Believe whatever you WANT.
Last edited by a moderator:
Deny, deny, deny
Here it is again:
while the Latin fathers, especially Tertullian and Cyprian, Hilary and Ambrose, guided rather by their practical experience than by speculative principles, emphasized the hereditary sin and hereditary guilt of man,
These were all before Augustine. Tertullian was not the first. Schaff is a recognized historian. I am not going to bother looking up your links. I have given you a credible source.
There is no such thing as a "teenager" in the Hebrew culture. The word "youth" means child. And concerning this verse Kiel and Delitzsch say:
If you cannot discern what is a simile or a metaphor, and what is not, then go back and take an English course.
Neither can you if you are dead. No dead person can walk. They have to be made spiritually alive before they can begin to walk. That is why they ALL were dead, but make alive through the Holy Spirit.
I never said anything different. We shall give account of ourselves. What makes you think anything different. You are throwing in a red herring that doesn't make sense.
"You are wrong." is not a refutation. :laugh:
The Judgment Seat of Christ is not a scene of punishment. It is a scene of reward and loss of reward. Study 1Cor.3:11-15. There is no punishment. The reward is likened to gold, silver and precious stones. In the New Testament there are actual crowns mentioned. There is no sense of punishment. You speak as if some are going to be punished in a purgatory. This is a Baptist board, not Catholic.
Again the Judgement seat of Christ speaks of reward and loss of reward. Do your study.
Moses wrote the Scriptures under the inspiration of God also.
He wrote:
"You shall not surely die."
And "You shall be as gods."
Do you also believe these statements Winman?
Just because they are inspired of God doesn't make the statement true. The context must be considered. You ignore context.
I guess it's my scholars versus yours. And you did not have to look up anything, all you had to do was click on the link I provided. It is more likely you simply don't want to see evidence that refutes your view.
1 Sam 17:33 And Saul said to David, Thou art not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him: for thou art but a youth, and he a man of war from his youth.
Wow, the battle between David and Goliath takes on new meaning with your interpretations. How old was David, six? How old was Goliath, ten? :laugh:
A "youth" generally means a teenager, someone in puberty. Why are you being ridiculous?
Psa 58:3 is obvious exaggeration. You cannot form doctrine from this Psalm, none of it is literal. Babies cannot speak when born, much less lie, they do not have teeth, they are not poisonous like snakes, and they do not melt like snails.
Yet this is your proof-text for Original Sin! :laugh:
I am not a Calvinist. The spiritually dead can do many things, they can bury their dead.
Mat 8:22 But Jesus said unto him, Follow me; and let the dead bury their dead.
The persons in Ephesians 2:1-3 are dead in trespasses and sins wherein they walked. A newborn baby cannot commit sin, because he does not know the law, and sin is not imputed when there is no law. Sin can only be committed by someone who knows between good and evil.
Dude, you say whatever is convenient at the moment, and then when someone refutes you, you change your tune.
But you are wrong, Satan, the fallen angels, and Adam and Eve all PROVE you do not have to have a sin nature to sin. The fact that you will not admit an OBVIOUS truth does not make you correct.
And you are wrong, if you suffer loss, that is punishment. If you drive drunk, they will take your license away. That is loss, and it is a punishment.
You are incredible, it's like arguing with a teenager.
And loss is a punishment.
Those are Satan's words. Solomon was a believer. You just don't give up do you?
And just because you don't like what Solomon said, that doesn't mean this scripture was philosophy. There is no reason whatsoever to regard Ecc 7:29 as philosophy, it was the observation of Solomon who was a believer, and the wisest man who ever lived. He certainly knew more than you, but that is not saying very much at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
Here is what the early church believed, even in the time of Augustine;
Even in Augustine's day, semi-Pelagianism was the dominant belief, even among the Latin fathers. Most believed that Adam brought physical death to the race, and there might be a moral weakness and propensity to sin attributable to physical death, but they did not believe men were born guilty of Adam's sin whatsoever. They DID NOT believe men were born dead in sin separated from God.
Even in Augustine's day, semi-Pelagianism was the dominant belief, even among the Latin fathers. Most believed that Adam brought physical death to the race, and there might be a moral weakness and propensity to sin attributable to physical death, but they did not believe men were born guilty of Adam's sin whatsoever. They DID NOT believe men were born dead in sin separated from God.
Last edited by a moderator: