User Tag List

Page 1 of 7 1234 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 104

Thread: Why is it believed that all men are condemned from birth?

  1. #1
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266

    Why is it believed that all men are condemned from birth?

    In this use of the word condemn do we not need to know what it means and why it is assumed man is, from birth?


    If using one word to define, please elaborate..

    Condemn =

  2. #2
    TOL Legend beloved57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    ATL
    Posts
    16,424
    Thanks
    176
    Thanked 721 Times in 690 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    46382
    Those Christ died for, the Christ I believe in, they are not born condemned by God, because Christ has already been condemned for them, and God's Wrath for them has been Propitiated !
    "... I have my own private opinion that there is no such a thing as
    preaching Christ and him crucified, unless you preach what now-a-days is
    called Calvinism. I have my own ideas, and those I always state boldly. It is
    a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else."

    Charles Spurgeon !

  3. #3
    Over 500 post club Word based mystic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    atlanta/loganville, georgia
    Posts
    713
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2307
    Quote Originally Posted by beloved57 View Post
    Those Christ died for, the Christ I believe in, they are not born condemned by God, because Christ has already been condemned for them, and God's Wrath for them has been Propitiated !
    yes beloved

    we understand you have changed the scriptures to validate your doctrine

    2 cor 5:15 and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.

    you change it to (and he died for some)

    For God so loved the world
    you change it to for God so loved the world that ((whosoever)) God ((programmed)) to believe
    no need for the word Whosoever

    you also change the meaning of 1 timothy 2:5 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth
    to actually mean who desires (only those He programmed) to be saved.
    eliminating the word (all)

    you also change 2 peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for (((any))) to perish but for ((all)) to come to repentance.

    throwing out the words any and all and replacing it with those He programmed to.

    also you need to toss out Gods ((patience)) towards all.
    else why would God need ((patience)) to those that he already programmed to be saved.

    you do a doctrinal dance in ignoring the ((fullness)) of scripture to validate your hypercalvinism.

  4. #4
    TOL Legend beloved57's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    ATL
    Posts
    16,424
    Thanks
    176
    Thanked 721 Times in 690 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    46382
    Quote Originally Posted by Word based mystic View Post
    yes beloved

    we understand you have changed the scriptures to validate your doctrine

    2 cor 5:15 and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.

    you change it to (and he died for some)

    For God so loved the world
    you change it to for God so loved the world that ((whosoever)) God ((programmed)) to believe
    no need for the word Whosoever

    you also change the meaning of 1 timothy 2:5 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth
    to actually mean who desires (only those He programmed) to be saved.
    eliminating the word (all)

    you also change 2 peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for (((any))) to perish but for ((all)) to come to repentance.

    throwing out the words any and all and replacing it with those He programmed to.

    also you need to toss out Gods ((patience)) towards all.
    else why would God need ((patience)) to those that he already programmed to be saved.

    you do a doctrinal dance in ignoring the ((fullness)) of scripture to validate your hypercalvinism.
    Like I said, I testify for the Christ i believe in!
    "... I have my own private opinion that there is no such a thing as
    preaching Christ and him crucified, unless you preach what now-a-days is
    called Calvinism. I have my own ideas, and those I always state boldly. It is
    a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else."

    Charles Spurgeon !

  5. #5
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    3,141
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 427 Times in 244 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    24361
    Quote Originally Posted by Word based mystic View Post
    yes beloved

    we understand you have changed the scriptures to validate your doctrine

    2 cor 5:15 and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.

    you change it to (and he died for some)

    For God so loved the world
    you change it to for God so loved the world that ((whosoever)) God ((programmed)) to believe
    no need for the word Whosoever

    you also change the meaning of 1 timothy 2:5 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth
    to actually mean who desires (only those He programmed) to be saved.
    eliminating the word (all)

    you also change 2 peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for (((any))) to perish but for ((all)) to come to repentance.

    throwing out the words any and all and replacing it with those He programmed to.

    also you need to toss out Gods ((patience)) towards all.
    else why would God need ((patience)) to those that he already programmed to be saved.

    you do a doctrinal dance in ignoring the ((fullness)) of scripture to validate your hypercalvinism.
    You don't understand Calvinism so why do you insist on making a fool of yourself? You deny God's sovereignty and His word. Woe to you come judgment time. Read the scriptures and learn something.
    Eph 2:8 For you are saved by grace through faith, and this is not from yourselves; it is God's gift --
    Eph 2:9 not from works, so that no one can boast.
    Eph 2:10 For we are His creation, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared ahead of time so that we should walk in them. [HCSB]

  6. #6
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266
    Quote Originally Posted by Word based mystic View Post
    yes beloved

    we understand you have changed the scriptures to validate your doctrine

    2 cor 5:15 and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.

    you change it to (and he died for some)

    For God so loved the world
    you change it to for God so loved the world that ((whosoever)) God ((programmed)) to believe
    no need for the word Whosoever

    you also change the meaning of 1 timothy 2:5 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth
    to actually mean who desires (only those He programmed) to be saved.
    eliminating the word (all)

    you also change 2 peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for (((any))) to perish but for ((all)) to come to repentance.

    throwing out the words any and all and replacing it with those He programmed to.

    also you need to toss out Gods ((patience)) towards all.
    else why would God need ((patience)) to those that he already programmed to be saved.

    you do a doctrinal dance in ignoring the ((fullness)) of scripture to validate your hypercalvinism.
    Good work, Bro!

  7. #7
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266
    Quote Originally Posted by Saved.One.by.Grace View Post
    You don't understand Calvinism so why do you insist on making a fool of yourself? You deny God's sovereignty and His word. Woe to you come judgment time. Read the scriptures and learn something.
    Question: Why must anyone understand Calvinism or consult his wrings to understand the scriptures? What Holy document even suggests that to be even a prerequisite when his writings are but an opinion about the holy?
    Last edited by Cross Reference; April 14th, 2015 at 11:32 AM.

  8. #8
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266
    Beloved57, How come you have stayed away from my Thread here?

    http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...d.php?t=109544

    No argument, eh?
    Last edited by Cross Reference; April 14th, 2015 at 11:33 AM.

  9. #9
    Journeyman Ardima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Miami FL
    Posts
    171
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post
    In this use of the word condemn do we not need to know what it means and why it is assumed man is, from birth?


    If using one word to define, please elaborate..

    Condemn =
    It was the plan from the beginning. God said, "From the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you must not eat of it: for in the day you eat thereof you will surely die" (Genesis 2:17). This statement is not "if/then" it is a declarative statement. God is telling Adam that he will eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and that he will die because of it. It wasn't a fall, it was always planned to happen that way. There is no plan "B" with God.

    That being said, because God declared that Adam was going to sin and die, it then becomes clear how Christ was slain from the foundation of the world. When Adam finally accomplished that which God had declared (eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) he was cursed by God. Just as it says in Hebrews chapter seven and verse nine and ten, "And so-to-speak, even Levi who is receiving tithes has payed tithes through Abraham. For he was still in his father's loins when Melchizedek met him." The same concept can be seen when it comes to condemnation. When Adam was cursed, the whole world was cursed while still in his loins. Every offspring

  10. #10
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266
    Quote Originally Posted by Ardima View Post
    It was the plan from the beginning. God said, "From the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you must not eat of it: for in the day you eat thereof you will surely die" (Genesis 2:17). This statement is not "if/then" it is a declarative statement. God is telling Adam that he will eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and that he will die because of it. It wasn't a fall, it was always planned to happen that way. There is no plan "B" with God.

    That being said, because God declared that Adam was going to sin and die, it then becomes clear how Christ was slain from the foundation of the world. When Adam finally accomplished that which God had declared (eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) he was cursed by God. Just as it says in Hebrews chapter seven and verse nine and ten, "And so-to-speak, even Levi who is receiving tithes has payed tithes through Abraham. For he was still in his father's loins when Melchizedek met him." The same concept can be seen when it comes to condemnation. When Adam was cursed, the whole world was cursed while still in his loins. Every offspring

    Very interesting but I don't believe a word of it. Can we begin with these 3 questions I feel are at the heart of this subject?

    1. Where is understanding from scripture, that God decreed Adam to sin?

    2. Can you also cite the verse, any verse, where it states Adam was cursed?

    3. Will you commit to a rational discussion purposed to lead us into the truth? Our replies need not be long, just rational. I have many questions that can only be answered truthfully by understanding that is self-reconciling with other understanding given us in the scriptures.

    What say you?

  11. #11
    Journeyman Ardima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Miami FL
    Posts
    171
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post
    Very interesting but I don't believe a word of it. Can we begin with these 3 questions I feel are at the heart of this subject?

    1. Where is understanding from scripture, that God decreed Adam to sin?
    I have already explained it to you. God did not say, "if you eat you will die." He said, "for in the day you eat you will die." Maybe an example would get what I am saying across. If I say, "for in the hour you take your last breath you will surely die," I am declaring that you will take your last breath and you will die. I may not know when you will take your last breath, but it will happen and you will surely die nonetheless. And as I also stated, if this were not the case, Jesus could not have been said to be the lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post
    2. Can you also cite the verse, any verse, where it states Adam was cursed?
    In the next question you ask if I will commit to a rational discussion purposed to lead us into the truth; however, in question 2 you set things up for you to win an argument instead of having a rational discussion.

    Genesis 3:17-19 States the curse on of Adam which includes God cursing the land directly because of what Adam did. Verses 14-19 make up a complete thought (the curse) beginning with the serpent, ending with Adam, and culminating with it being a result of what Adam did. This is why Paul makes the claim, "in Adam all die." (1 Corinthians 15:22)

    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post
    3. Will you commit to a rational discussion purposed to lead us into the truth? Our replies need not be long, just rational. I have many questions that can only be answered truthfully by understanding that is self-reconciling with other understanding given us in the scriptures.

    What say you?
    I say that I am all for it if you will also commit to a rational discussion rather than trying to win an argument based on technicalities and semantics.

  12. #12
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266
    [QUOTE=Ardima;4292708]
    I have already explained it to you. God did not say, "if you eat you will die." He said, "for in the day you eat you will die."
    And that day came and Adam died. Where is the implication of a decree in that?

    Maybe an example would get what I am saying across. If I say, "for in the hour you take your last breath you will surely die," I am declaring that you will take your last breath and you will die. I may not know when you will take your last breath, but it will happen and you will surely die nonetheless. And as I also stated, if this were not the case, Jesus could not have been said to be the lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
    But God [fore]knew and pre-planned for Adam's failure. .

    1. It is a mistake to to believe God's warnings are decrees. It muddies the water of what He purposes for our understanding when doing so. In yellow is not a decree bur a warning that carries with it a penalty for doing so. It is not something for which God purposes but of His Holiness, can only abide by.

  13. #13
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266
    [QUOTE=Ardima;4292708]

    In the next question you ask if I will commit to a rational discussion purposed to lead us into the truth; however, in question 2 you set things up for you to win an argument instead of having a rational discussion.
    How so? By asking a queston re you are saying?

    Genesis 3:17-19 States the curse on of Adam which includes God cursing the land directly because of what Adam did. Verses 14-19 make up a complete thought (the curse) beginning with the serpent, ending with Adam, and culminating with it being a result of what Adam did. This is why Paul makes the claim, "in Adam all die." (1 Corinthians 15:22)
    OK. I will give you vs 19 as being the curse FOR Adam that we suffer with. However, that opens the door for you to present a needful understanding of what death means as Paul intended to have it conveyed to us? Can you do that without reciting commentaries? IOW, do you know your Bible well enough to throw away your commentaries and rely upon the scriptures and maybe write your own?

    I say that I am all for it if you will also commit to a rational discussion rather than trying to win an argument based on technicalities and semantics.
    Good. I will hold you to the same conditions because so far from you, it has been semantics I am reading.

  14. #14
    Journeyman Ardima's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Miami FL
    Posts
    171
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post


    How so? By asking a queston re you are saying?
    I'm not sure how to approach this because it seems that part of the complete thought got cut out either by human error or autocorrect... Could you please either edit the post or post another with the complete thought?



    [QUOTE=Cross Reference;4292739]
    Quote Originally Posted by Ardima View Post
    OK. I will give you vs 19 as being the curse FOR Adam that we suffer with. However, that opens the door for you to present a needful understanding of what death means as Paul intended to have it conveyed to us? Can you do that without reciting commentaries? IOW, do you know your Bible well enough to throw away your commentaries and rely upon the scriptures and maybe write your own?
    I would be glad to expand on this without the use of commentaries; however, it will have to be later tonight. I have to pick up my wife from work now.



    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post
    Good. I will hold you to the same conditions because so far from you, it has been semantics I am reading.
    Semantics is not bad as long as it holds to the whole scope of scripture and contributes to the rational discussion and is not used to simply "win an argument." I believe it is safe to say that we are both moving forward toward a genuine discussion which will lead to the truth concerning the OP. The accountability of both parties is essential to this discussion and welcomed. I believe that this will be the kind of conversation that is lacking on TOL recently.

    God bless.

  15. #15
    TOL Legend Cross Reference's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    9,236
    Thanks
    119
    Thanked 587 Times in 535 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    83266
    [QUOTE=Ardima;4292768]I'm not sure how to approach this because it seems that part of the complete thought got cut out either by human error or autocorrect... Could you please either edit the post or post another with the complete thought?



    Quote Originally Posted by Cross Reference View Post
    I would be glad to expand on this without the use of commentaries; however, it will have to be later tonight. I have to pick up my wife from work now.





    Semantics is not bad as long as it holds to the whole scope of scripture and contributes to the rational discussion and is not used to simply "win an argument." I believe it is safe to say that we are both moving forward toward a genuine discussion which will lead to the truth concerning the OP. The accountability of both parties is essential to this discussion and welcomed. I believe that this will be the kind of conversation that is lacking on TOL recently.

    God bless.
    Amen! Take the night off as I will also to think on the OP.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us