This Do, and Thou Shalt Live

[Jerry Shugart]

Now the truth is very simple.....Belief is a sign of life…it confirms that you have been born again, it is not the cause of regeneration but an effect of it.

The truth is indeed simple and the Apostle John makes it plain that "life" comes as a result of believing:

"Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believethat Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name" (Jn.20:30-31).

It is beyond me how anyone can assert that "life" is not the result of faith, especially with this passage in view.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

both "have sinned" and "be dead" are found in the Aorist tense NOT THE PRESENT TENSE or the FUTURE TENSE!

I have already explained this to you and in order to make what Paul said fit your view you just edit what he said. Now let us look at this "unedited" version of Paul's words:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Ro.5:12).

The Greek word translated "past" and the Greek word translated "death" are both in the Aorist tense so of course Paul uses the same tense when he later speaks of the same death.

But in order to make what Paul said match your ideas you must edit what he said by adding the two words (in "bold") which cannot be found in the original Greek:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned IN ADAM" (Ro.5:12).

Anyone can make the Scriptures say anything that want them to say by using that scurrilous method os exegesis.

 

[The Biblicist]

The truth is indeed simple and the Apostle John makes it plain that "life" comes as a result of believing:

"Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believethat Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name" (Jn.20:30-31).

It is beyond me how anyone can assert that "life" is not the result of faith, especially with this passage in view.

Nobody denies that! I have NEVER denied that! However, you deny any difference between regeneration and justfication in regard to eternal life!

YOU HAVE NEVER RESPONDED to my explicit and detailed distinctions between regeneration and justification! Why? I will tell you why, because you cannot answer them !

 

[The Biblicist]

I have already explained this to you and in order to make what Paul said fit your view you just edit what he said. Now let us look at this "unedited" version of Paul's words:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Ro.5:12).

The Greek word translated "past" and the Greek word translated "death" are both in the Aorist tense so of course Paul uses the same tense when he later speaks of the same death.

Wake up and smell the roses! They are both given in the Aorist tense because death passed IMMEDIATELY at the POINT Adam sinned the whole HUMAN NATURE acted in Adam in that sin.


But in order to make what Paul said match your ideas you must edit what he said by adding the two words (in "bold") which cannot be found in the original Greek:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned IN ADAM" (Ro.5:12).

I don't have to edit them because Paul himself in a context where Adam's representative action is discussed explicitly identified death to be "IN" Adam (1 Cor. 15:22). The tenses in the same verse (Rom. 5:12) proves it occurred IN Adam. The repeated "by one man's offence many were made sinners" and "by one man's offence many BE DEAD" prove it occurred IN Adam.

On the other hand you must change the word "sin" to mean "law" and you must change the Aorist tense "have sinned" to mean "shall sin".
You talk about changing scripture to make it mean what you want, you take the cake in this contest whereas the context and overall context of Paul's teaching restrict death to be "IN Adam" just as it restricts spiritual life to be "IN Christ" - 1 Cor. 15:22.

1 Cor. 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

1 Cor. 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Ro.5:12).

There is absolutely nothing in this passage, including but not limited to any verb tense, that forces the conclusion that all infants are sinners. Biblicist, you are beside yourself straining gnats and swallowing camels in support of Augustinian original sin.

Sin lies in the will of man and not in the constitution of the flesh as Augustine drew from his heathen philosophical background. Being born is not, nor can it be, a violation of the law of God. Sin is at its very basis a willful transgression against a known commandment of God. Sin is a transgression of the law. No man, according to Scripture, is responsible for the sins of another, and certainly no infant is responsible for the sins of his mother.........unless you find Jesus was responsible for the sins of Mary, and as such a sinner from birth. GOD FORBID. Such nonsense is imbibed with the notion of original sin. Such denials must be formed as to the humanity of God come in the flesh when such notions as original sin are held.

 

[The Biblicist]

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" (Ro.5:12).

Sin lies in the will of man and not in the constitution of the flesh as Augustine drew from his heathen philosophical background.

False! The will is a constituent part of the flesh and cannot be isolated, separated and made independent apart from the flesh!

Pre-fallen Adam did not have the fleshly fallen nature and so pre-fallen Adam cannot be the model to define the flesh or the will in relationship to the fallen nature!

Being born is not, nor can it be, a violation of the law of God.

False straw man argument! No one ever said being born is a sin! Being born was a prefallen purpose revealed before the fall. It is what you are born as which is sin not being born!

Sin is at its very basis a willful transgression against a known commandment of God.

Adam acted in behalf of the whole human race when he transgressed God's law in Genesis 2:16 which Paul repeatedly states over and over again in Romans 5:15-19

"By one man's offence MANY BE DEAD"
"By one man's offence MANY WERE MADE SINNERS"

When Adam sinned all sinned because he acted as their representative "by one man's offence"

That is the meaning of Romans 5:12! That is the argument proven by Romans 5:13-14. That is the argument explicitly repeated in Romans 5:15-19.

What was passed down was passed IMMEDIATELY AT THE POINT OF HIS OFFENCE because the whole human nature was IN ADAM when he sinned and that is why the Aorist tense is used in verse 12 "passed" and "Have sinned." That is why the Aorist tense is used in verse 15 "BE DEAD" because it happened instanteously to the whole human nature contained in Adam at the very moment he sinned he died spiritually and so did all humanity because all humanity is simply individualization of that one human nature contained in Adam and that human nature was corrupted by that one sin!

The absolute proof which you nor anyone who embraces your false teaching can answer is why infants NATURALLY DO EVIL without rational decision or training and must be restrained! It comes from the womb by nature - Adam's fallen nature!

Sin is the transgression of the law

That is only one defintion of sin. Sin is also OMISSION of the law or COMING SHORT of the glory of God. When infants express attitudes of anger, wrath, contempt, deceit, selfisness, stubborness, etc., are these attributes of the glory of God? The image of God? If not, then what is their moral source???

No man, according to Scripture, is responsible for the sins of another, and certainly no infant is responsible for the sins of his mother.........

No other man in history but Christ acted as a Representative for "many" but Adam! Hence, no other father in history can have their sin imputed to their offspring. Simple ignorance of scritpure is your problem.

unless you find Jesus was responsible for the sins of Mary, and as such a sinner from birth. GOD FORBID.

The sin nature is transmitted through the father not the mother. That is why Jesus was virgin born without a human father. That is why Genesis 3:15 predicts the Savior would come not of the seed of man but the seed of the woman.

Such denials must be formed as to the humanity of God come in the flesh when such notions as original sin are held.

Christ was not "made" by two parents but concived by the Holy Ghost in the womb of Mary. As a man he therefore was transmitted the righteous nature of the one conceving Him - God the HOLY Spirit!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: False! The will is a constituent part of the flesh and cannot be isolated, separated and made independent apart from the flesh!

HP: I am cognizant of flesh and blood. I am also cognizant of an inner man not flesh and blood. If you cannot separate the will of man from the flesh, will flesh and blood inherit eternity?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: Pre-fallen Adam did not have the fleshly fallen nature and so pre-fallen Adam cannot be the model to define the flesh or the will in relationship to the fallen nature!

HP: Here is the philosophy of Biblicist, unproven by Scripture or reason. He assumes a fallen nature by Adams posterity, and then reasons from that unfounded position in a circle, using that yet unfounded notion to prove his premise that Adam cannot be the model to define the flesh...... That indicates to me a logical fallacy. Begging the question as to whether or not man is born with a "fleshy fallen nature" (whatever that is) does not satisfy anyone's mind but the one doing it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1771783#post1771783
Being born is not, nor can it be, a violation of the law of God.

Biblicist: False straw man argument! No one ever said being born is a sin! Being born was a prefallen purpose revealed before the fall. It is what you are born as which is sin not being born!

HP: No straw men here. If man is born as a sinner, to be born must be paramount to sin as the two are inseparable. Sin is the state we are born in. To be born is to be a sinner. Sin and physical birth are inseparable concepts according to Biblicist. You cannot consider one without the other. They are again 'one' according to Biblicist.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1771783#post1771783
Sin is at its very basis a willful transgression against a known commandment of God.

Biblicist: Adam acted in behalf of the whole human race when he transgressed God's law in Genesis 2:16 which Paul repeatedly states over and over again in Romans 5:15-19

HP: That is yet another unfounded philosophical position not stated or implied in the text itself. IF one has eyes to read, the question as to why all men sin is NOT because all are born human as Biblicist falsely concludes, but rather is stated in clear precise terms in Scripture, i.e., "BECAUSE ALL HAVE SINNED." Biblicist need to exercise his magic prowess of language on the word 'because."

Biblicist: "By one man's offence MANY BE DEAD"
"By one man's offence MANY WERE MADE SINNERS"

When Adam sinned all sinned because he acted as their representative "by one man's offence"

HP: Can you tell us what the GK word 'many' depicts? I would even settle for the English definition. I would give it but I know you accept no authority on language besides yourself or others that echo like sentiments, so I will allow you to proceed without my input. Show us how you extrapolate the word 'many' into ' the entire Human race from birth,' no less, and 'that without exception.'

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Biblicist: : That is the meaning of Romans 5:12! That is the argument proven by Romans 5:13-14. That is the argument explicitly repeated in Romans 5:15-19.

What was passed down was passed IMMEDIATELY AT THE POINT OF HIS OFFENCE because the whole human nature was IN ADAM when he sinned and that is why the Aorist tense is used in verse 12 "passed" and "Have sinned." That is why the Aorist tense is used in verse 15 "BE DEAD" because it happened instanteously to the whole human nature contained in Adam at the very moment he sinned he died spiritually and so did all humanity because all humanity is simply individualization of that one human nature contained in Adam and that human nature was corrupted by that one sin!

The absolute proof which you nor anyone who embraces your false teaching can answer is why infants NATURALLY DO EVIL without rational decision or training and must be restrained! It comes from the womb by nature - Adam's fallen nature!

HP: That is by no means absolute proof of a sinful nature from birth as you suggest.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1771783#post1771783
Sin is the transgression of the law

Biblicist: That is only one defintion of sin. Sin is also OMISSION of the law or COMING SHORT of the glory of God. When infants express attitudes of anger, wrath, contempt, deceit, selfisness, stubborness, etc., are these attributes of the glory of God? The image of God? If not, then what is their moral source???

HP: You have the floor Biblicist. Show us your Biblical definition of sin as you descibe it, since you are the self proclaimed expert here. Show us where (in context of course) Scripture attributes your list of evils against infants as you suppose it does. Don't just give us your philosophy concerning sin and the nature of infants. Show us from the Word of God, again paying close attention to the context of the passages you set forth.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1771783#post1771783
No man, according to Scripture, is responsible for the sins of another, and certainly no infant is responsible for the sins of his mother.........

Biblicist: No other man in history but Christ acted as a Representative for "many" but Adam! Hence, no other father in history can have their sin imputed to their offspring. Simple ignorance of scritpure is your problem.

HP: You have not shown one scripture that states Adam was sour representative and that all are sinners as a direct result of inheriting sin from him. The passage you cite in Romans says no such thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1771783#post1771783
unless you find Jesus was responsible for the sins of Mary, and as such a sinner from birth. GOD FORBID.

Biblicist: The sin nature is transmitted through the father not the mother. That is why Jesus was virgin born without a human father. That is why Genesis 3:15 predicts the Savior would come not of the seed of man but the seed of the woman.

HP: Says who??? Oh, I forgot. You alone are the expert. if you say something we are just suppose to accept it for gospel.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1771783#post1771783
Such denials must be formed as to the humanity of God come in the flesh when such notions as original sin are held.

Biblicist: Christ was not "made" by two parents but concived by the Holy Ghost in the womb of Mary. As a man he therefore was transmitted the

righteous nature of the one conceving Him - God the HOLY Spirit!

HP: Scripture never indicates anything other than Joseph was the father of Jesus, Joseph, not Mary, being in the lineage of David. All we know is that the seed was impklanted by the Holy Spiirt and not through humans means. Scripture says that He took upon Himself the 'seed' of Abraham. That would signify to me a human seed, just as all humans are formed with, yet by supernatural means of implantation.

Tell us, if no human seed was used, how He took upon Himself the "seed" of Abraham. Tell us how Joseph was in the direct lineage of David, a lineage needed to fulfill Scripture concerning the Messiah, if a human seed of Abraham/David/ Joseph was not used. I am open to new insight. Enlighten us. :thumbsup:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

The truth is indeed simple and the Apostle John makes it plain that "life" comes as a result of believing:

"Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believethat Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name" (Jn.20:30-31).

It is beyond me how anyone can assert that "life" is not the result of faith, especially with this passage in view.

See it is amazing to me is your refusal to understand that regeneration is a work of God by which a spiritually dead individual is brought to life in Christ. Tell me then, what is your position on mentally deficient people & those who never hear the gospel? I also guess that you readily relegate those who have the sin of unbelief to fiery hell without sympathy.