I looked at your link, mostly at who wrote it.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.
First the original writer, a German, C. G. Bretschneider, is so obscure he is difficult to locate even through a google search.
But the person that translated the work, Professor Henry Cowles of Oberlin College., is a far more common figure. As a professor at Oberlin College, he would have taught the accepted doctrines that Charles Finney established there a few years earlier. Finney was a heretic. To accept your link as having value is ridiculous. Oberlin theology denies the sinfulness of man, believes in the entire sanctification of man. In fact Finney thought it entirely possible that a perfectly sinless community could be preserved here on earth though he never accomplished it.
1 Sam 17:33
The word is first defined by its Hebrew word, not by the English translation, and second by context. There are many times the word "youth" may refer to small children.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?
I don't have "a proof text." I have many scriptures that run throughout the totality of Scripture, almost in every book. There is much doctrine in the book of Psalms. Peter demonstrated that Christ was the Messiah on the Day of Pentecost by using the Psalms.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!
The verse says nothing of babies having teeth, snakes and snails. If you don't understand the Psalm, then you need to do more study.
A spiritually dead person cannot do one good deed in the sight of God.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.
You never refuted me. I have never changed my stance.Dude, you say whatever is convenient at the moment, and then when someone refutes you, you change your tune.
The Scriptures say "we shall all give account of ourselves before God." That is true. But it has nothing to do with depravity.
It is a red herring. You are not a created being like Adam and Lucifer. Apples and oranges.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.
If it is Christmas and one of my children receives six gifts and the other receives five gifts is there any punishment?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.
No, there is only reward. Some get more reward than others. Each are rewarded according to their works, according as the Lord wills. There is no punishment here.
Both are the inspired word of God. Both are not necessarily from God's point of view. You fail to see that.Those are Satan's words. Solomon was a believer. You just don't give up do you?
You need to study this book before you comment on it.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.