User Tag List

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 105

Thread: Pela... Who? Don't know him! and how Augustine Original Sin has been addressed.

  1. #16
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    17,650
    Thanks
    7,745
    Thanked 25,140 Times in 12,730 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    71 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147731
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil.Eye.<(I)> View Post
    Let's start with Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

    This states in many translations that we were conceived "within" iniquity... as in... brought forth into a sinful world...
    Yep, sin entered into the world....not into those born into the world.

    Romans 5:12 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:

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    Evil.Eye.<(I)> (August 11th, 2017),Tambora (August 14th, 2017)

  3. #17
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    979
    Thanks
    724
    Thanked 248 Times in 202 Posts

    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    89213
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    Thank you, humbly.
    I am going to truncate a bit, if I miss something important to you, please bring it back up to me.

    I believe the Lord Jesus was her Savior too. Mariology is always an interesting discussion, for me, because it is a congregation-up doctrine. It really started grass roots rather than from the Pope/Cardinals down. It is unique.

    Which is really what I was saying when I said the RC has to agree on this particular. We all do. "Works" theology is difficult across board (we all wrestle with it in our own groups). It is also one of the primary denominational splitters.



    I used to be Catholic, so some of this may be area comments. I've noticed not all priests are as up on proper Catholic theology as they ought to be. Some laymen like yourself on TOL, actually have a better grasp on some of this than a priest or two I've listened to or talked to.

    This is about the line I'd heard in sermons from priests as well.


    No problem. For me, dialogue is important. We aren't changing one another persay, though I very much believe God is sovereign over our conversations. I apologize briefly for EE and I. Things do get heated about things we cherish in doctrine, but there is no way, he or I, would stop being brothers in Christ. The tenor, however, can get rough. I think I can give as good as I get, but I seldom do with E.E. I won't with you either. His grace. -Lon
    Thank you for all the compliments. You are too kind.

    And I did not see a single issue within your response. I just wanted to throw my cent's worth in.

    I assure you, though we may disagree on trivialities, I still consider you a brother in Christ. I honestly told EE the same thing earlier. Keep up the good work.

    God Bless you, friend.


    Sent from my iPhone using TOL

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to jsanford108 For Your Post:

    Evil.Eye.<(I)> (August 11th, 2017)

  5. #18
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    17,650
    Thanks
    7,745
    Thanked 25,140 Times in 12,730 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    71 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147731
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil.Eye.<(I)> View Post
    You are still skipping my actual dialogue and inserting your own!

    It is enormously important to note that you didn't adress a single thing I wrote and generateted your own quotes that are not mine... to avoid the actual points I brought forth.

    Every quoted word that you placed as a quote... which I DID not generate... is a false argument that sidesteps the issues I addressed.

    You can't bring Pel. into this or you are going to get "scolded"!


    Here's what I say. Where would they be if they were stuck on a desert island with just a Bible, and no one to direct them to these Bible commentators? Ah, now that would be a conversation worth having. Too many labels and not enough use of one's brain. Read it like you believe it.....AS IT'S WRITTEN.

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    Evil.Eye.<(I)> (August 11th, 2017),Tambora (August 14th, 2017)

  7. #19
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    17,650
    Thanks
    7,745
    Thanked 25,140 Times in 12,730 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    71 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147731
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post



    Summation: 1) The Lord Jesus Christ is unique (different) than man. He is fully man, but we must be careful with our doctrines to think we are exactly like Him or He us.
    Well then He would not really be fully man, would He? His divinity in no way interfered with His humanity. Jesus was a spiritual man from the moment of birth. Exactly as we are when the Holy Spirit comes to dwell in us. What makes us different is we have old habits....like skin that needs to be shed (put off). Once a person sins, it's hard to forget sin's draw. The only advantage Jesus had over us was having never sinned.

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    Evil.Eye.<(I)> (August 11th, 2017),Tambora (August 14th, 2017)

  9. #20
    TOL Subscriber Lon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    8,366
    Thanks
    1,806
    Thanked 3,531 Times in 2,096 Posts

    Mentioned
    78 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1714980
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post
    Here's what I say. Where would they be if they were stuck on a desert island with just a Bible, and no one to direct them to these Bible commentators? Ah, now that would be a conversation worth having. Too many labels and not enough use of one's brain. Read it like you believe it.....AS IT'S WRITTEN.
    Did you even read him? 7492 words equals 16 pages, 32 double-spaced
    If you did, tell me, what is the 'unholy trinity?
    What does 'love need' according to E.E.?
    What is the strongest verse for Original sin according to E.E.?
    Is E.E. right? How would I begin to respond to 32 pages of text?
    What did he say that you found important that I needed 'commentary' for? What was my 'first post?' How many scriptures?
    Do I choose to address him word for word?
    What about Ezekiel 28:15 & Ezek. 28:17? I think they are about Satan, thus Self-explanatory why I don't believe anyone is born sinless. This short repost? Not even covering page one of 32 pages....
    I 'think' there are more obvious reasons I didn't address his post. I appreciate him looking up all his previous posts and redumping all 7492, 32 pages worth, but I don't know anybody who is inclined to respond to that. Squeeky doesn't even have a beginning post this long. Nobody does. It isn't condusive for forum discussion.
    My New Years Resolution: 1 Peter 3:15
    Omniscient without man's qualification. John 1:3 "Nothing"
    Colossians 1:17 "Nothing" John 15:5 "Nothing"
    Mighty, ALL mighty (omnipotent). Revelation 1:8
    No possible limitation Isaiah 40:25 Joshua 24:15
    Infinite (Omnipresent) Psalm 145:3 Hebrews 4:13

    Is Calvinism okay? Yep

    Now to Him who is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think... Amen. -Ephesians 3:20 & 21

    1Co 13:11 ... when I became an adult, I set aside childish ways. Titus 3:10 Ephesians 4:29-32; 5:11

    Separation of church and State is not atheism "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..."

  10. #21
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    17,650
    Thanks
    7,745
    Thanked 25,140 Times in 12,730 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    71 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147731
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    Hebrews 4:15 He is able to empathize with our infirmities as God. Catholics embrace Mary as sinless because of this yet, inconsistently, eschew semi-pelagianism. The doctrine of a sinless Mary, however, is semi-pelagian. They know Semipelagianism is heterodox at the best, heresy at the worst and so they endeavor to eschew it. You are close to the Catholic position. Oddly, the United Methodist Church is too and they have become Semipelagian as well.
    From the link: Semi-Pelagianism ....denied important points of the faith. Its basic claims were:

    Gets into monergism/synergism discussion as well, but Catholics necessarily have to agree with Calvinism to remain orthodox and biblical.


    They agree with Calvinism and grace salvation, inconsistently because they are caught in works-salvation issues.

    While penance and confession are designed to prevail upon grace, those are tokens toward grace rather than reliance, such is the strained dichotomy of walking worthy and a less than secured salvation of hope rather than standing.

    To me, strong elements of semipelagian theology yet sticks from those years of wrestling and re-wrestling with Pelagianism. Catholic doctrines leave the RC vulnerable to this day, to semipelagian sentiment. More importantly, the Open Theology movement with Boyd and Sanders courting Mormons in dialogue, the Open View too, has a natural theological weakness for falling back into Pelagian and Semi-Pelagian heresy and sinless birth is 1 and 2 (full Pelagian) and 3 (thus semi-pelagian and is against the life,death, and work of the Lord Jesus Christ (which is why both Semi-pelagianism and Pelagianism are heresies).



    -Lon
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    Did you even read him? 7492 words equals 16 pages, 32 double-spaced
    No, I didn't read him. I read you....what you wrote above and my post was in response to that.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    Evil.Eye.<(I)> (August 11th, 2017),Tambora (August 14th, 2017)

  12. #22
    Over 4000 post club 1Mind1Spirit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    4,746
    Thanks
    560
    Thanked 986 Times in 787 Posts

    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    595879
    ...

  13. #23
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    A distant planet called earth.
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    6,742
    Thanked 1,825 Times in 1,401 Posts

    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    Or Open Theist it up? Why even bring either up?

    Though I do like Dort and Westminster, so what? .
    Idols of theological formulation that cause you to see scriptural mirages that aren't there.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    I've read some of Boyd Sanders and Pinnock (don't really like much of it, but have read it anyway). I like Enyart's The Plot. It doesn't mean anything, EE. Just chalk it up for well read and lets enjoy scripture and the things of God. I believe my question, specifically, for me, ends this discussion. You? Probably not. Almost all of us believe we are born in sin, not sinless.
    This was almost cordial... but... ahem... born into sin and born a "sinner" with sin on the Tally are two separate subjects. And... "Most"... Really? Mob rules? Do you have the study and statistics and are they global or just conducted by people with a desire to farm such results? If the lemmings go over the cliff, @Lon... are you following?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    A few don't. Earth shattering? Not to me. I want you to know why I'm not and what specific considerations keep me from that door. We've both agreed we aren't going to change each other. If we can see each other's points, that would be meaningful to me. If not? Then let's just not go there or what have you.
    I breath a tiny bit of fire and now we're shutting down. I can say "fair"... but seriously? Don't you see that this dialogue pushes one another to search out the Why of our understanding beyond what the Lemmings say?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    I actually believe the tree of Life was of no consequence until 'after' sin. Eating it, from my perspective, would have just been life to 'more life.'
    Awesome... scripture to back that... please.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    In Him -Lon
    I know I'm difficult... I appreciate your back and forth.

    - In Him. - EE. Aka... fellow sibling of thunder

  14. #24
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    A distant planet called earth.
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    6,742
    Thanked 1,825 Times in 1,401 Posts

    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by 1Mind1Spirit View Post
    ...
    ?

  15. #25
    TOL Subscriber glorydaz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    17,650
    Thanks
    7,745
    Thanked 25,140 Times in 12,730 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    71 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147731
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil.Eye.<(I)> View Post
    This was almost cordial... but... ahem... born into sin and born a "sinner" with sin on the Tally are two separate subjects. And... "Most"... Really? Mob rules? Do you have the study and statistics and are they global or just conducted by people with a desire to farm such results? If the lemmings go over the cliff, @Lon... are you following?


    Most people would say we are born innocent....without sin. The son is not guilty of his father's sin. Jesus spoke of the innocent children making up the kingdom of God, and we see there are innocents mentioned throughout the scripture. It's sad when people accuse our Righteous God of counting the innocent as being guilty of Adam's sin. It takes some mighty scripture twisting to do so.

    Exodus 23:7 Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to glorydaz For Your Post:

    Evil.Eye.<(I)> (August 11th, 2017),Tambora (August 14th, 2017)

  17. #26
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    A distant planet called earth.
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    6,742
    Thanked 1,825 Times in 1,401 Posts

    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by glorydaz View Post
    Most people would say we are born innocent....without sin. The son is not guilty of his father's sin. Jesus spoke of the innocent children making up the kingdom of God, and we see there are innocents mentioned throughout the scripture. It's sad when people accuse our Righteous God of counting the innocent as being guilty of Adam's sin. It takes some mighty scripture twisting to do so.

    Exodus 23:7 Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked.
    That falls in line with justice. The idea that innocence could be declared guilty before guilt is so out of line with justice that I'm always shocked some people hand God the bag of declaring all guilty... before their initial guilt.

    We all fall short and into the category of guilty by our own devices and response to being in a sinful world. This old world and the devils trappings grab all of us that don't happen to be "The Almighty With Us". I'm always supprised when that is complicated to some.

    Anyhow... gratitude.

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Evil.Eye.<(I)> For Your Post:

    glorydaz (August 12th, 2017)

  19. #27
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,305
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,215 Times in 2,410 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1096466
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil.Eye.<(I)> View Post
    That falls in line with justice. The idea that innocence could be declared guilty before guilt is so out of line with justice that I'm always shocked some people hand God the bag of declaring all guilty... before their initial guilt.

    We all fall short and into the category of guilty by our own devices and response to being in a sinful world. This old world and the devils trappings grab all of us that don't happen to be "The Almighty With Us". I'm always supprised when that is complicated to some.

    Anyhow... gratitude.
    Do passages like the following show God is a respector even of an eight day old child?

    Genesis 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.

    Rom. 8:5
    Acts 17:11,12

  20. #28
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    A distant planet called earth.
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    6,742
    Thanked 1,825 Times in 1,401 Posts

    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Danoh View Post
    Do passages like the following show God is a respector even of an eight day old child?

    Genesis 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.

    Rom. 8:5
    Acts 17:11,12
    Drop a line to Richard Dawkins. He'll appreciate your take on that verse. Christ's words, context and full biblical narrative bring more to "Light" then you are acknowledging. And Danoh... even if you have something (# 1-800-Long-Shot)... it still appears the "baby" has an 8 day period of blameleness before it's "expiration date."



    Now for the curve ball... Which came first... Circumcision or Faith?

    And... Context of Genesis 17...

    When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, “I am God Almighty; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. 2 Then I will make my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers.”

    3 Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4 “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. 5 No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham,for I have made you a father of many nations. 6 I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. 7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”

    ... # Tisk Tisk... is that cherry picker on loan... or is it "paid in full"?

  21. #29
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    A distant planet called earth.
    Posts
    5,145
    Thanks
    6,742
    Thanked 1,825 Times in 1,401 Posts

    Blog Entries
    9
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Lon View Post
    Not really going to spend too much time on it. You were talking about obfuscations. I asked one question. Angry that I asked a question?

    You can't be. Can't possibly be. You said prior: "Finally! I've been waiting for this one! I shall answer the morrow.

    " What changed between yesterday and today? Not me! I believe it the crux of the matter. Obfuscation? Nope. You answered saying
    "yes" even the unborn need a Savior. Why the rant??? I have NO problem asking you questions that make you think.... Question: "WHY do the unborn need a Savior?" Answer: "Because they have no access to the tree of life?" Okay, then , in what way did Adam and Eve "surely" die if they needed the tree of life? (don't flame out, nothing here to flame about, not a thing, we are discussing Christ and His doctrines, they are life, if joy isn't part of it, let's stop right here?) -Lon
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil.Eye.<(I)> View Post
    You know my debate style. I even prefaced with ornery. I'll dial it down a bit and respond on a tamer note... as long as dialogue is nimble and responsive and not drudged down with inapplicable arguments that are as alien as a Muslim at a barbecued Pork ribs convention.

    As for my well known demeanor...



    You know I'm "theatrical".

    I extend a sincere apology to you if I offended.

    You remain my brother of thunder. I'm just the loud mouthed brother. My points remain made... but my showmanship was indeed for effect and amplification of my recognition of a tactic you've previously used that I responded to in a similar... but dialed down manner.

    Tit for tat... but no injected dialogue that sidesteps actual dialogue.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Evil.Eye.<(I)> For Your Post:

    Lon (August 12th, 2017)

  23. #30
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    13,305
    Thanks
    370
    Thanked 3,215 Times in 2,410 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1096466
    Quote Originally Posted by Evil.Eye.<(I)> View Post
    Drop a line to Richard Dawkins. He'll appreciate your take on that verse. Christ's words, context and full biblical narrative bring more to "Light" then you are acknowledging. And Danoh... even if you have something (# 1-800-Long-Shot)... it still appears the "baby" has an 8 day period of blameleness before it's "expiration date."



    Now for the curve ball... Which came first... Circumcision or Faith?

    And... Context of Genesis 17...

    When Abram was ninety-nine years old, the Lord appeared to him and said, “I am God Almighty; walk before me faithfully and be blameless. 2 Then I will make my covenant between me and you and will greatly increase your numbers.”

    3 Abram fell facedown, and God said to him, 4 “As for me, this is my covenant with you: You will be the father of many nations. 5 No longer will you be called Abram; your name will be Abraham,for I have made you a father of many nations. 6 I will make you very fruitful; I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you. 7 I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you. 8 The whole land of Canaan, where you now reside as a foreigner, I will give as an everlasting possession to you and your descendants after you; and I will be their God.”

    ... # Tisk Tisk... is that cherry picker on loan... or is it "paid in full"?
    lol

    You can be funny; I'll give ya that.

    Rom. 5:8

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Danoh For Your Post:

    Evil.Eye.<(I)> (August 11th, 2017),Lon (August 12th, 2017)

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