There Was a Time, Long, Long Ago.....

[JIM]

Who are the mentioned specifically?

Augustine, Pelagius, Luther, Erasmus, Calvin, Arminius, Whitefield, Wesley, Finney.

 

[JIM]

I would say whoever thinks Adam’s sin is a condemnation on the flesh and blood nature of man is correct.

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

Eze 18:20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

Jer 31:30 But everyone shall die for his own sin. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge.

Nothing there about Adam's sin. That any would suffer for the sins of Adam, except Adam himself is firmly denied by God, Himself.

The flesh and blood nature of man was put there by God himself in the creation of man. Whoever thinks Adam’s sin is a condemnation on the flesh and blood nature of man is not listening to God.

 

[JIM]

We see in the Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles, the words "believe" connected to the person and work of Christ, and believing as the way to eternal life. We see the command to repent given. Somehow, thanks to Finney and many, many after to this very day, something was inserted into all those statements of believing and repenting that is nowhere found in them. And that is the word "choose". Before this corruption and the wide scale loss of doctrinal teachings, doctrine itself having become a thing to be avoided as unnecessary and even dangerous, congregants weren't taught that word was there, and they never thought to put it there or decide it was implied, having been firmly established in who God is and who mankind was in relation to him. God was the center of their religion and Christ was the cornerstone and capstone of all. God was the creator and owner and governor over all his creation. It was, long, long, ago, always God's will being done, even in salvation and those he saves. It was a glorious, glorious thing that He would stoop down to treasonous humanity and send his Christ, and Christ would come and suffer and die in the place of a sinner, to take upon himself their just punishment, and that Jesus would willingly lay down his life on their behalf. They didn't worry about choosing or not choosing. Their cry was, "I believe, I believe!" And if any did not believe, they didn't worry about it either. They simply considered the whole thing foolishness.

Perhaps the answer in all of that is what does it mean to "believe" and how does that come about. The monergist says it has nothing to do with the one who believes but is strictly a gift from God to whom He chooses; but that is wrong.

 

[Alive]

Honestly, I am not sure how to respond directly to the OP, which covers a lot of ground. I suppose I see the Church, big C a bit differently. The invisible Body of Christ exists and transcends the doctrinal differences.
Truth is always important and all sincere members of the truly elect, will differ and change as more light is given.
My journey was somewhat different from the typical church goer, so my POV is different in some ways.
I was fortunate to learn important things early on as a babe, that moved me toward not being a babe.
The Lord had me focused in the early years…maybe 8 years, not on how we get saved, but about the Christian Life after being saved. The wonder of that New Life and the very real results. He had me focus on Him because He spoke to me many times for specific reasons to teach milestones, for His Purposes.
Life was more about a relationship between Father, Lord and son, than doctrine.
A foundation in Life.
As a pastor in a Pentecostal denomination, we had alter calls, but Christ was preached…oh yes.
That denomination in which I was ordained was indeed Arminian, but the focus was not there as an argument of doctrine juxtaposed against Calvin. It was later I learned of the controversy.
I simply read scripture and one day, those things coalesced in me.
After leaving that denomination, I studied much more about the Reformation and even held Calvin in contempt for what he did in Geneva. After a time, the Lord convicted me of that and I repented. I teach monergism, but do not couch it in terms of the ‘groups’, I simply show what I see in scripture. One of those milestones I mentioned came in a dream where the Lord showed me the horror of division from His perspective. It had a powerful and lasting affect.
There is much more. Yes, doctrinal Truth is always important, but Life more so.
I lived the reformation early on while seeing folks converting from the RCC and apologizing those heresies. I fellowshipped with Franciscan Monks in those early years and saw the Lord working. He will work in His elect and I learned He is not offended by errors in honest seekers. He is patient, and so I must be.

 

[JIM]

Honestly, I am not sure how to respond directly to the OP, which covers a lot of ground. I suppose I see the Church, big C a bit differently. The invisible Body of Christ exists and transcends the doctrinal differences.
Truth is always important and all sincere members of the truly elect, will differ and change as more light is given.
My journey was somewhat different from the typical church goer, so my POV is different in some ways.
I was fortunate to learn important things early on as a babe, that moved me toward not being a babe.
The Lord had me focused in the early years…maybe 8 years, not on how we get saved, but about the Christian Life after being saved. The wonder of that New Life and the very real results. He had me focus on Him because He spoke to me many times for specific reasons to teach milestones, for His Purposes.
Life was more about a relationship between Father, Lord and son, than doctrine.
A foundation in Life.
As a pastor in a Pentecostal denomination, we had alter calls, but Christ was preached…oh yes.
That denomination in which I was ordained was indeed Arminian, but the focus was not there as an argument of doctrine juxtaposed against Calvin. It was later I learned of the controversy.
I simply read scripture and one day, those things coalesced in me.
After leaving that denomination, I studied much more about the Reformation and even held Calvin in contempt for what he did in Geneva. After a time, the Lord convicted me of that and I repented. I teach monergism, but do not couch it in terms of the ‘groups’, I simply show what I see in scripture. One of those milestones I mentioned came in a dream where the Lord showed me the horror of division from His perspective. It had a powerful and lasting affect.
There is much more. Yes, doctrinal Truth is always important, but Life more so.
I lived the reformation early on while seeing folks converting from the RCC and apologizing those heresies. I fellowshipped with Franciscan Monks in those early years and saw the Lord working. He will work in His elect and I learned He is not offended by errors in honest seekers. He is patient, and so I must be.

It is certainly a blessing that the absolute "correctness" of our faith is not the determining factor in whether God saves us.

 

[Alive]

It is certainly a blessing that the absolute "correctness" of our faith is not the determining factor in whether God saves us.

Yes…good take away.
If it were not so, we would all be doomed. BUT..we are not.

 

[LeviR]

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

Eze 18:20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

Jer 31:30 But everyone shall die for his own sin. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge.

Nothing there about Adam's sin. That any would suffer for the sins of Adam, except Adam himself is firmly denied by God, Himself.

The flesh and blood nature of man was put there by God himself in the creation of man. Whoever thinks Adam’s sin is a condemnation on the flesh and blood nature of man is not listening to God.

The goal of scripture interpretation is not to find one passage of scripture in order to contradict another and then choose to believe what one you like best.

Ezekiel is not contradicting Paul in Romans. Humans are not charged guilty of the specific sin of Adam. They are charged with being in Adam when he sinned. The condemnation is against the mortal flesh and blood nature not the specific sin.

 

[Mr GLee]

Eze 18:4 Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

Eze 18:20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

Jer 31:30 But everyone shall die for his own sin. Each man who eats sour grapes, his teeth shall be set on edge.

Nothing there about Adam's sin. That any would suffer for the sins of Adam, except Adam himself is firmly denied by God, Himself.

The flesh and blood nature of man was put there by God himself in the creation of man. Whoever thinks Adam’s sin is a condemnation on the flesh and blood nature of man is not listening to God.

I would offer

Luke 24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

Adam's flesh and bones are used to signify Christ the husband of the bride the church . Eve's flesh and blood to represent the bride as new creatures, sons of God not what we will be when we receive the incorruptible .

Genesis. The foundation of the "kingdom of priest" using Adam and Eve like he does with the example with Moses and Arron below.

My (addition)

Exodus 7;1-2 And the Lord said unto Moses,(Adam) See, I have made thee(Adam) a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother (Eve) shall be thy prophet. Thou (Adam) shalt speak all that I command thee: and Aaron(Eve) thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he send the children of Israel out of his land.

Adam likened to Christ our husband revealing his word to his prophet priestess Eve to represent the whole church sent out as a apostle .Like Deborah, Rehab or Zipporah .

Adam refused to protect her from false prophecy An unauthorized addition to the letter of the law "thou shall not eat of the tree hidden in the middle of the garden" or in dying your body return to dust and temporal spirit return to Christ the Father of all spirit life ,

satn the father of lies from that beging thou shall not surely die. Lust after my beauty SSssss and live forever .

Satan the king of lying signs to wonder that some seek after after rather than prophecy .Lucifer added to prophecy with false prohecy "neither shall you touch".

Satan the god of this world . . .lust of the eye giving way to the lust of the flesh working togethter the building blocks of false pride. . the fall Seeing they could not resist the feel and di not die they ate

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Christ our husband has rescued us from false prohecy false pride the spirit of the antichrist (another teaching authority other than sola scriptura.

 

[JIM]

The goal of scripture interpretation is not to find one passage of scripture in order to contradict another and then choose to believe what one you like best.

Ezekiel is not contradicting Paul in Romans. Humans are not charged guilty of the specific sin of Adam. They are charged with being in Adam when he sinned. The condemnation is against the mortal flesh and blood nature not the specific sin.

I fully realize that Ezekiel is not contradicting Paul in Romans. And Paul in Romans is not contradicting Ezekiel. The idea of "being in Adam when he sinned" is absolutely ludicrous. The phrase, "in Adam", simply means being human as God created mankind. Nothing about God's creation, the human being, changed when Adam sinned. And that is the message of Paul in Romans. God is not condemning the mortal flesh and blood nature of the human being; it is exactly what God created. How could it not be?

 

[LeviR]

I fully realize that Ezekiel is not contradicting Paul in Romans. And Paul in Romans is not contradicting Ezekiel. The idea of "being in Adam when he sinned" is absolutely ludicrous. The phrase, "in Adam", simply means being human as God created mankind. Nothing about God's creation, the human being, changed when Adam sinned. And that is the message of Paul in Romans. God is not condemning the mortal flesh and blood nature of the human being; it is exactly what God created. How could it not be?

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

All were in Adam when he sinned, and that’s why in him all die.
None were in Christ when Adam sinned. So only those who pass from the death that Adam brought upon mankind to the life in Christ shall be made alive.

The condemnation of the flesh and blood nature comes because that nature is sinful.

 

[JIM]

Jim…you know you are not to criticize mods in public, right?

Did you take that as criticism? Before, each time I have been deleted, there was a message saying so. I didn't see such a message on that one.

 

[JIM]

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

All were in Adam when he sinned, and that’s why in him all die.
None were in Christ when Adam sinned. So only those who pass from the death that Adam brought upon mankind to the life in Christ shall be made alive.

Please explain in some detail how you were "in Adam" when he sinned. As you state it, it is just nuts. It is a meaningless statement. I wasn't there, you were there, in fact only Adam and Eve were there when he sinned.

Please note that both conditions in 1 Corinthians 15:22 are universal. All die. All will be resurrected. The point of that passage is that without Christ, none would be resurrected; all would universally be condemned to eternal damnation.

 

[LeviR]

@JIM

Rom 5:19 - For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.

Adam’s sin made many sinners.

The claim of Reformed Theology is that “we sin because we are sinners”. IOW, we are all sinners. We are sinners from birth.
But the fact is, we die because the nature has been condemned and it is the nature that is sinful.
A baby dies not because the baby is a sinner but because the nature is sinful.

 

[Arial]

Please explain in some detail how you were "in Adam" when he sinned. As you state it, it is just nuts. It is a meaningless statement. I wasn't there, you were there, in fact only Adam and Eve were there when he sinned.

Please note that both conditions in 1 Corinthians 15:22 are universal. All die. All will be resurrected. The point of that passage is that without Christ, none would be resurrected; all would universally be condemned to eternal damnation.

Why would you ask him to do that in a thread that is not about that? See rule #3 and please try and abide by it.

 

[JIM]

@JIM

Rom 5:19 - For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man's obedience many will be made righteous.

Adam’s sin made many sinners.

The claim of Reformed Theology is that “we sin because we are sinners”. IOW, we are all sinners. We are sinners from birth.
But the fact is, we die because the nature has been condemned and it is the nature that is sinful.
A baby dies not because the baby is a sinner but because the nature is sinful.

You quote Romans 5:19 and assign the effect of Adam's disobedience to the entire human race. It assigns the effect of Jesus' obedience to the very same entire human race. But you just don't get it. Why? Because that does not align with your false soteriology.

What that verse says is that the effect of Jesus' obedience negated the effect of Adam's disobedience. In other words, were it not for Jesus, all humanity would have been effectively condemned at birth; however in Jesus' obedience that is not the case. The spirit of each as given by God is alive and righteous at birth. We become sinners when we sin.

 

[JIM]

Why would you ask him to do that in a thread that is not about that? See rule #3 and please try and abide by it.

But neither was his statement. You didn't tell him to see rule #3 and try to abide by it. I seem to be the only one you ever call out on that. I wonder why. Maybe I have just missed something.

 

[LeviR]

You quote Romans 5:19 and assign the effect of Adam's disobedience to the entire human race. It assigns the effect of Jesus' obedience to the very same entire human race. But you just don't get it. Why? Because that does not align with your false soteriology.

What that verse says is that the effect of Jesus' obedience negated the effect of Adam's disobedience. In other words, were it not for Jesus, all humanity would have been effectively condemned at birth; however in Jesus' obedience that is not the case. The spirit of each as given by God is alive and righteous at birth. We become sinners when we sin.

This is why I mentioned in an early post that the denial of the resurrection of Jesus is to deny that the dead are raised. And if Jesus is not raised, you will not be raised, and therefore your faith is worthless.
If the spirit is the person who returns to God at the death of the body, then how does No resurrection of the dead make faith worthless?

It is from the idea that the “real person” exists as a spirit in the body which departs the body at death is the cause of ALL this division.

 

[Alive]

Did you take that as criticism? Before, each time I have been deleted, there was a message saying so. I didn't see such a message on that one.

I can’t answer to that.

 

[JIM]

I can’t answer to that.

If I, with my non-Calvinist soteriology, am not welcome here, just say so.

 

[Mr GLee]

Honestly, I am not sure how to respond directly to the OP, which covers a lot of ground. I suppose I see the Church, big C a bit differently. The invisible Body of Christ exists and transcends the doctrinal differences.
Truth is always important and all sincere members of the truly elect, will differ and change as more light is given.
My journey was somewhat different from the typical church goer, so my POV is different in some ways.

Thanks for the testimony. My journey what I call the wilderness began at 33 now 76 a slow learner

I would offer .

The prescrition for revealing the mysteries of faith found 2 Corinthians 4:18.

my paraphrase . While we look or understand not by temporal things seen. But invisible things of mysteries of faith and gain not the temporal things seen . as a law of the fathers orals traditons of mankind.

One of the "think not" or give it "no thought" doctrines The outward Jew that was trusting his temporal flesh .he that did not seek after the invisible. .Oral traditions putting their hope in the flesh of Abraham passed down in a succession of dying mankind as if it the legion of fathers replaces our Holy Father in heaven not giving his glory to dying men called fathers

Christ informed them if he desired he could raise up children as lively stones (petra's) the spirit invisible body

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham (Peter) to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

1 Peter 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual (unseen) sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Catholicism carried on that oral tradition of dying mankind that make the word of God sola scriptura without efect

The wilderness journey ceremonial signs to the unbelieving world . Not a sign unto them selves . the danger of Aaron's two sons adding to the word of God with oral traditions strange fire.

Different kinds of ministries that a person can volunteer in . . as a gospel sign to all the nations