ECT Suggestion to Knight

[Jerry Shugart]

Jesus' human nature is just like ours, that is like ours was meant to be when Adam was unfallen, righteous and obedient.

According to the theory of Original Sin a little infant emerges from the womb spiritually dead. What happens to that infant if he dies before he is born again by the Spirit?

Is he headed for hell through no fault of his own?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

People die because it is an effect of the totally corrupted nature.

No, people corrupt themselves:

"And the LORD said unto Moses, Go, get thee down; for thy people, which thou broughtest out of the land of Egypt, have corrupted themselves" (Ex.32:7).​

To corrupt something means to change something from being in a "good" state to being in a "ruined" state.

So before anyone can corrupt himself he is in a state that can only be described as good, and David confirms that people emerge from the womb "wonderfully" made:

"For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well" (Ps.139:13-14).​

If an infant emerges from the womb corrupted and dead spiritually then the Lord Jesus would never say the following about little children:

"Then people brought little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them and pray for them. But the disciples rebuked them. Jesus said, 'Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these'" (Mt.19:13-14).​

According to the theory of Original Sin little children are dead spiritually and the Scriptures reveal that no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born again. So according to the theory a little child has no chance at all of being in the kingdom but that theory is demolishede by the Lord Jesus'words that the kingdom belongs to little children.

It amazes me that people still cling to a theory which was formulated in the dark ages even though the words of the Lord Jesus that the kingdom belongs to little children completely destroys that theory.

 

[tdhiggins]

Jerry, you’re misunderstanding original sin. The point is not that little children cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. The can. So long as they are God’s elect. Let’s be honest with one another. You don’t want to admit that the Scriptures teach original sin because you want to deny predestination. You would rather put your pagan philosophy over the plain and clear teaching of Scripture.

 

[marhig]

Jerry, you’re misunderstanding original sin. The point is not that little children cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. The can. So long as they are God’s elect. Let’s be honest with one another. You don’t want to admit that the Scriptures teach original sin because you want to deny predestination. You would rather put your pagan philosophy over the plain and clear teaching of Scripture.

Do you honestly believe that an innocent baby would go to hell?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry, you’re misunderstanding original sin. The point is not that little children cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. The can.

According to the theory of Original Sin an infant emerges from the womb spiritually dead. And before anyone can enter the kingdom he must be born again, born of the Spirit. And since infants cannot even understand the gospel then it is impossible that they are born again.

So tell me how an infant can be born again.

You don’t want to admit that the Scriptures teach original sin because you want to deny predestination.

I deny the theory of Original Sin because that theory makes the LORD the author of sin. If people emerge from the womb spiritually dead and wholly inclined to all evil, as the false theory teaches, then the LORD must be held responsible for that because He makes us.

However, that is impossible because in Him there is no darkness.

Do you not understand that if the theory of Original Sin is correct then no one but the LORD can be held responsible for all the sins since Adam and Eve?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Do you honestly believe that an innocent baby would go to hell?

They do believe that!

I wonder how many earnest seekers of the truth found in the Christian revelation have turned their backs to Christianity when they hear Christians teach that innocent babies are condemned to hell because they are held responsible for Adam's sin.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

None are born morally upright

None are born morally upright

Jerry, you’re misunderstanding original sin. The point is not that little children cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. They can. So long as they are God’s elect. Let’s be honest with one another. You don’t want to admit that the Scriptures teach original sin because you want to deny predestination. You would rather put your pagan philosophy over the plain and clear teaching of Scripture.

I also tend to think those who deny original sin operate by the assumption that they are autonomous captains of their own destinies.

Worth a read as the backdrop to the topic at hand:
The Pelagian Captivity of the Church

Our actual sins are the fruit of our corruption. Our actual sins are not separate from the source, Original Sin. But it is correct to reason—as our forbears have—that these particulars are not the ground of condemnation. The condemnation is the condition in which we are born: condemned already. We don't get more condemned because of our actual sins. But, those actual sins store up the strokes (Luke 12:47) due as penalty for such evil deeds.

Original sin consists in the guilt of Adam's first sin, the want of original righteousness, and the corruption of our whole nature. The actual transgressions proceeding from this fallen nature are the fruit of this nature. These actual transgressions prove our guilt and desert of condemnation; just as our post-justification good works, done imperfectly (hence without merit), but sincerely and in the Spirit, serve as proof of the divine work of inward renovation.

We do not become sinners by sinning, we sin because we are sinners from birth.

AMR

 

[marhig]

They do believe that!

I wonder how many earnest seekers of the truth found in the Christian revelation have turned their backs to Christianity when they hear Christians teach that innocent babies are condemned to hell because they are held responsible for Adam's sin.

I can't believe it, that's awful. We suffer for our own sins. How anyone can believe that an innocent baby would go to hell unless they were predestined to go to heaven is beyond me. They have not yet sinned and we are not held accountable until we realise what we are doing and purposely sin.

Jesus said, "suffer the little children to me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven," and he also brought a child into the midst and said

Matthew 18

And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven

I'm sure that if Jesus said that we are to become as little children to enter into the kingdom of heaven, then all little children are seen as innocent in his eyes. And we are to be converted and go back to that innocence to enter in.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Our actual sins are the fruit of our corruption.

According to the theory of Original Sin men emerge from the womb spiritually dead and that is the reason why they sin. However, the Scriptures tell a different story. Let us look at the following passage:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas. 1:14-15).​

In the book Fallen:A Theology of Sin (a book which defends the theory of Original Sin) David B. Calhoun writes the following commentary about this passage:

"Temptation leads to sin, and, for the unrepentant, sin leads to spiritual death. 'Each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it is conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death' (James 1:14-15). James describes the deadly progression from evil desire, to being dragged away, to enticement, to conception, to birth and then finally to death. This sixfold progression proceeds from the mind, to the affections, to the will, to outward action, and to spiritual death" (David B. Calhoun, "Sin and Temptation" in Fallen: A Theology of Sin, 264).​

When a person sins that sin separates Him from the source of spiritual life, God (Isa.59:2). So when a person sins he becomes spiritually dead.

And since all people sin and become spiritually dead then that can only mean that at one time all people were spiritually alive. After all, no one can die spiritually unless they are first alive spiritually.

And the only way that all people can be alive spiritually is because all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive.

With that the theory of Original Sin comes tumbling down like a child's house of cards!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I'm sure that if Jesus said that we are to become as little children to enter into the kingdom of heaven, then all little children are seen as innocent in his eyes. And we are to be converted and go back to that innocence to enter in.

For some reason there are many Christians who put more faith in a theory which was formulated during the dark ages than they do in what the Lord Jesus said about little children.

Imagine that!

 

[john w]

You go from bad to worse!

First you say that the Lord Jesus is in heaven now in a natural body..

I never said He is "now in a natural body," as you continually charge. You talk like satan. He talks like you, with satanic accusations, lying. Well done, kid.

now you say that Adam was created without blood!

Not "now"-I've said that for years, kid. Read it, satanic accuser:

Adam-no blood:

Genesis 2:23 KJV

And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man

The Lord Jesus Christ-now-no blood:

Luke 24:39 KJV

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.


Ephesians 5:30 KJV

for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.


Why?:



1 Corinthians 15:50 KJV

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.


I know that is quite deep, for you, satanic kid, and the following, as you are fed with milk, and not with meat, as you are not able to bear strong meat, choking on it, per Hebrews 1 Corinthians 3:2 KJV, Hebrews 5:12 KJV. I expound the following brilliance, not for you, as it is way over your head, but for mature members of the boc, who, unlike you, don't throw tantrums, drool on their bibs and bunny shirts, and have teacheable spirits.


Typically, the "flesh and blood" references, when dealing with fallen mankind, is synonymous with the fallen, sinful nature of man. To wit:Gospel of Matthew as follows;

Matthew 16 KJV

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Details....The bible, on purpose, employs the term "flesh and blood." Not "others....man...."-"flesh and blood." Thus, the Lord Jesus Christ, in context, is not referencing Peter's physical frame/body here, being flesh and blood; No, He is referencing his sinful fallen nature. The Master is indicating, teaching, that because of Peter'’s fallen nature, that he would have never come to this realization/assessment/declaration, on his own. Details....To wit, Paul, for 3 years, being schooled, by "the Lord from heaven"(1 Corinthians 15:47):


Galatians 1 KJV


16 to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: 17 neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. 18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

"flesh and blood"... The apostle to the Gentiles is not referencing the physical flesh, but of fallen, sinful man, by nature subject to wrath. To wit...survey Ephesians 6 KJV:


12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.


Layers of teaching here... Granted, the respective member of the boc does not physically confront/oppose others, the lost included, as, in the deeper understanding of Paul's point, it is not referring to the physical body, but of the sinful nature that resides in all men. Thus, our struggle, our battle, is not against the sinful nature that resides in other men, but the spiritual forces of evil influencing each man. Hence, Paul earlier in Ephesians, writes:




Ephesians 2:2 KJV

wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:



Again...Survey 1 Corinthians 15 KJV:

“ 50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

Paul is not asserting that that a physical body cannot inherit the kingdom of God, per Luke 24:39....The Lord Jesus Christ....post resurrection, in a glorified, yet, yes, physical body, as He was seen, ate...................That the 1 Cor. 15 passage is not talking about a physical body, is verified in the same chapter. Verses 42-44:


42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: 43 it is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: 44 it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body.

There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

The term "spiritual body" is not, as some "argue"(Like Preterists)merely a body consisting of spirit, some "disembodied spirit," "Caspar the Ghost," Kinda like" a ghostly, intangible body. "pnumaticas soma"= describes something physical=a physical body that is spiritual in nature, "energized" by the resurrected life of the Savior, the Spirit of God within them(like Adam had pre-fall),butnot subject to decay/corruption..

Survey Luke 24:39 again....The glorified, resurrected Lord Jesus Christ appears unto the troops. The risen Lord, not accidentally, but meticulously makes a point to show the disciples that He was indeed resurrected, indeed had a physical body. And the bible is careful to say, describe His physical body, as consisting of.....what?:

"flesh and bones"


Not-"flesh and blood."


Same as Adam, pre-fall. Same as the Saviour, now, per, again:





Ephesians 5:30 KJV

for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
Details.

Thus, I conclude, quite brilliantly, in extreme humility, that pre-fall, Adam and Eve had spiritual bodies of flesh and bone, "energized" by the Spirit of God, that did not require the life sustaining properties of blood, as we have now. Adam's life was sustained through the Spirit of God. God Himself, His Spirit, was their life's "blood." When daddy Adam fell, the Spirit of God left him, he thus died spiritually, "dead in trespasses and sin," removing the life sustaining force of the Spirit of God, and physical blood was put in its place. Eternal life lost, replaced by mortal, corruptable life, powered by the life in the blood, which is perishable, and only capable of sustaining mortal life. Thus, now,in our mortal bodies, blood nourishes the cells, that are in need of constant repair. The blood supplies the necessary elements to keep our decaying bodies alive. In our "devolving," quite corruptible, vile, weak, "unchanged"(Philippians 3:21 KJV), "the life of the flesh is in the blood," per Leviticus 17;11-14 KJV. But just as "the last Adam," the Lord Jesus Christ, was resurrected from the dead, "changed"/transformed with a glorified body, that maintains it’s eternal life force from God the Father Himself, we too, whether it is resurrected members of the believing remnant of the nation Israel, or forever justified saints, members of the boc, who believe 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV, with "the redemption of the body...the adoption"(Romans 8:23 KJV),at the "catching away/seizure by force," will be transformed as He was, and is.


Rejoice in this:

Philippians 3:21 KJV
who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.


Many may disagree with me, but at least I laid it out.


Stay with the milk, kid, then take your day time nap.

 

[Derf]

The apostle John tells the Christian that they already have eternal life, and that life is in the Son:

"And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son" (1 Jn.5:11).​

John doesn't say anything which even hints that these Christians do not posess eternal life in the Son.

I believe what John said. Do you?

Eternal life would mean that you don't die. If someone has eternal life, yet still dies, one has to wonder what kind of eternal life they have. Saying that a spirit of the person lives on, despite the death of his body is one possible answer. But that's not a full explanation, as we expect that our bodies will be resurrected.

So if the physical body is part of eternal life, and the physical body will still die, that eternal life that has been given to us is a promise, not an actuality. But as God would not lie, we can take His promise as actuality--that our future state will be life with no death.

You quote John's letter. John wrote this in his gospel:
Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: [Jhn 11:25 KJV]
And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this? [Jhn 11:26 KJV]

So if one is dead that believes in Jesus, he shall live. And those that live and believe shall not die.

Yet Martha, to whom Jesus spoke, and who assuredly believed in Jesus, died. Only Jesus called such death "sleep" when applied to Lazarus, her brother. When the disciples questioned Him on it, he reiterated that Lazarus was not just asleep as we think of it, but dead.

None of this was somehow put off by saying that Lazarus's spirit was alive, even though his body was dead.

I'm just suggesting that the idea of spiritual death meaning separation from God may not be as all-encompassing a solution as some use it, and it may not be necessary at all for the verses you have quoted. But the concept seems to drive the interpretation of scripture, rather than being made to fit in with scripture.

That's where such concepts can go wrong.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I never said He is "now in a natural body," as you continually charge. You talk like satan. He talks like you, with satanic accusations, lying. Well done, kid.

I said that the Scriptures reveal that people in their flesh and blood bodies cannot enter into the heavenly kingdom (1 Cor.15:5) so the Lord Jesus is not now in heaven in a flesh and blood body.

To that you pointed to Luke 24:39 as your proof that Jesus is now in heaven in a flesh and bone body and not a flesh and blood body.

So according to you the spiritual body of the Lord Jesus, the same kind of body in which Christians will be raised from the dead (1 Cor.15:44), is nothing but a natural body minus the blood!

Adam-no blood

And now you are saying that before Adam sinned he also had a body which was without blood despite the fact that "the life of the flesh is in the blood" (Lev.17:11).

Thus, I conclude, quite brilliantly, in extreme humility, that pre-fall, Adam and Eve had spiritual bodies of flesh and bone, 'energized" by the Spirit of God, that did not require the life sustaining properties of blood, as we have now?

From what you said there it is obvious that you think that a flesh and bone body minus the blood is the same thing as a spiritual body. Besides that, no one on earth will receive a spiritual body until they are raised from the dead or are caught up to meet the Lord Jesus in the air:

"So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body" (1 Cor.15:42-44).​

Many may disagree with me, but at least I laid it out.

Sonny boy, you would have done yourself a big favor if you would have just kept quiet!

 

[tdhiggins]

Do you honestly believe that an innocent baby would go to hell?

Apart from grace, there are no innocent babies. If a child is one of God's elect, then they are His, they will not have to pay for their sins (which is what hell is) since their sins have been atoned for by the work of Christ.

 

[tdhiggins]

According to the theory of Original Sin an infant emerges from the womb spiritually dead. And before anyone can enter the kingdom he must be born again, born of the Spirit. And since infants cannot even understand the gospel then it is impossible that they are born again.

So tell me how an infant can be born again.

Predestination. I believe that, since God predestined some for adoption before the foundation of world, the sins of all of God's elect were atoned for on the cross. So let's go even further. Let's say in the case of a miscarriage. What happens with the child? I would say this. If the child is one of God's elect, he/she is in paradise with the Lord. If the child is not one of God's elect, then he/she will pay for their sinful nature.

This is harsh; it is not a pleasant or happy doctrine. But it is true. All are condemned because of Adam's sin. And the reason I am so adamant about this is because Scripture proclaims it. David said, in sin did my mother conceive me. You can try and twist that any way you want, but the clear and plain meaning is that from conception, he was immersed in sin, just as we are.

I deny the theory of Original Sin because that theory makes the LORD the author of sin. If people emerge from the womb spiritually dead and wholly inclined to all evil, as the false theory teaches, then the LORD must be held responsible for that because He makes us.

However, that is impossible because in Him there is no darkness.

Do you not understand that if the theory of Original Sin is correct then no one but the LORD can be held responsible for all the sins since Adam and Eve?

You are simply wrong. You are deluded by humanist philosophy. Men are held morally and legally guilty for their sinful nature unless they are God's elect, in which case He saves them. The LORD is not held responsible for Adam's sin. And it is Adam's sin which is the source of our corruption.

Romans 9:19-24. God destines some for wrath and some for mercy, and who are you to speak back to Him?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Eternal life would mean that you don't die.

The "inner man" (as opposed to the "outward man") will not die. The Lord Jesus said the following and it is obvious that He is not speaking of the outward man not dying:

"I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die" (Jn.11:25).​

Those who believe will never suffer the second death:

"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death" (Rev.21:8).​

All believers have eternal life right now and that life is in the Son. The Lord Jesus said that those to whom He gives eternal life will never perish (Jn.10:28).

Do you think that they can?

 

[Danoh]

According to the theory of Original Sin a little infant emerges from the womb spiritually dead. What happens to that infant if he dies before he is born again by the Spirit?

Is he headed for hell through no fault of his own?

The assertion that "sin is not imputed where there is no law" is not the assertion that there is no sin, rather, that it is not imputed where there is no law.

For the wages of sin - death - is STILL one a piece.

At the same time, just as in God's dealings with the little ones within Israel, we ourselves also, if wise, know righteously better than to hold babies and our little ones accountable for those transgressions they are not yet able to discern are just that - transgressions.

And in God's case, such is the case due to Rom. 5: 6-8 - in EACH our STEAD.

But the wages of sin (singular) is (singular) death.

Babies also need a Saviour.

Else no resurrection from the dead unto eternal life for those precious little ones who die at anytime between conception and toddler-hood.

Meaning, by the way, that God is obviously PRO-Life...begins at conception :thumb:

Amen!

And Rom. 5: 6-8!

 

[marhig]

Apart from grace, there are no innocent babies. If a child is one of God's elect, then they are His, they will not have to pay for their sins (which is what hell is) since their sins have been atoned for by the work of Christ.

Would you put a newborn baby that had never sinned into hell? Or into a hellish situation?

I can't believe that anyone can believe in something so absurd. Why do you think that God would do this?

You might have explained this already but I haven't read all this thread sorry, so why do you believe this? Thanks

 

[marhig]

Predestination. I believe that, since God predestined some for adoption before the foundation of world, the sins of all of God's elect were atoned for on the cross. So let's go even further. Let's say in the case of a miscarriage. What happens with the child? I would say this. If the child is one of God's elect, he/she is in paradise with the Lord. If the child is not one of God's elect, then he/she will pay for their sinful nature.

This is harsh; it is not a pleasant or happy doctrine. But it is true. All are condemned because of Adam's sin. And the reason I am so adamant about this is because Scripture proclaims it. David said, in sin did my mother conceive me. You can try and twist that any way you want, but the clear and plain meaning is that from conception, he was immersed in sin, just as we are.





You are simply wrong. You are deluded by humanist philosophy. Men are held morally and legally guilty for their sinful nature unless they are God's elect, in which case He saves them. The LORD is not held responsible for Adam's sin. And it is Adam's sin which is the source of our corruption.

Romans 9:19-24. God destines some for wrath and some for mercy, and who are you to speak back to Him?

What sinful nature will a miscarried baby pay for? They haven't sinned. That's just crazy!

 

[marhig]

Why would Jesus use little children as an example of what we have to be like to enter into heaven if little children go to hell?