ECT The Most Misunderstood Passage in the Bible--Romans 5:12-18

[Shasta]

I am now treading lightly, because you are well written, and not a "Son of Thunder" as [MENTION=6696]Lon[/MENTION] would say... but then again... as Lon can demonstrate... Son's of Thunder can walk quietly, but speak with Thunderous clarity.

I now know one thing about you for certain... You speak from your heart and do so enormously sincerely. This is a second event that makes me appreciate your words more.

I believe I understand your statement... but I think I see where I believe your understanding may need more focus.

Consider this... Israel is the "Bride of Christ" that is currently the "widow". Yet... we know that the union of God and Mankind is a deeply symbolic event. It is the "Spiritual" union (No carnal involved) ... of the Groom with His Bride. To get more specific... the Creator with "All Humanity"... as Mary's lineage is scripturally traced all the way back to Adam. But we know that this is symbolic of EVE... The "Mother of Life, or All humanity"... with understanding of the Patriarchal lineage shift that must be taken into account... due to Hebrew tradition of recording lineage.

To get direct... The event of God binding to Flesh within the womb was as if God had held "His Bride" tightly and romantically "Consummated" His marriage to "Humanity".

The immaculate conception / Virgin Birth is one of the most sacred events of creation and in scripture, as the perfect Groom bound Himself to His "Adulterous" bride in an act of loving forgiveness. If you doubt this... read the book of Hosea. It is unmistakable. We are like a whoring Bride, lusting after other men... before God.

I can't even begin to describe how utterly leveling this truth is. It is most likely the single most powerful analogy in scripture to me that binds me forever to the depth of the Love of Jesus.

To simply state that the "Holy Spirit" + Humanity = God is fully inaccurate. God... Jesus... hmmm... specifically the Son or "Body" of God we know as the Logos/Memra/Word of creation... is the very "Glory" of God... "Heb. 1:3" and I'm certain you know that this is what Moses saw in Ex. 33:18 when He boldly asked God to "Show... him His... Glory". We further know that every theophany in scripture is this very manifestation. This means that the WORD becoming FLESH was the very inception of the LOGOS becoming ETERNALLY bound to our flesh.

To suggest that this was the simple result of the Spirit joining with Humanity and thus yielding a "perfect" human "like God" is falling short of the depth of the matter.

No other can or ever will be Him. No amount of Spiritual intervention from the Spirit within a newly conceived child could yield what we Love so deeply.

I hope this is received well, and I admit that this is merely my perception of the matter. I would ascribe humility, but I'm "Evil" after all.

With Respect and Appreciation for your well articulated posts,

- EE

ty. I do not claim to understand the depth of this topic.

 

[glorydaz]

Dordt is the document that represents TULIP. TULIP is an acronym that came much later to help describe the five points of Calvinism.

There is no true understanding of TULIP without reading the Canons of Dordt.

I don't have to read Mein Kampf to know what Hilter promoted. In fact, I believe it would be detrimental for me to give it any consideration whatsoever. Look how so many people have fallen under the spell of TULIP. Total depravity is the first of the errors....verses ripped out of their context to prove men are UNABLE to seek God...unable to believe God. Nonsense.

 

[Eagles Wings]

I don't have to read Mein Kampf to know what Hilter promoted. In fact, I believe it would be detrimental for me to give it any consideration whatsoever. Look how so many people have fallen under the spell of TULIP. Total depravity is the first of the errors....verses ripped out of their context to prove men are UNABLE to seek God...unable to believe God. Nonsense.

The Lord, Himself, told us we would need Him for salvation. John 3:3

The root of that need is obviously what this thread is about.

Eph 2:1,5

Gen. 6:5

Gen. 8:21

The matter is settled for me. I think the bible is very clear on the doctrine of man's inability to choose God.

 

[Shasta]

No, you didn't misrepresent me. Let us look at what Shasta said here:

Here we have Job, a full-grown man born long before God ever made the new birth possible, already a possessor of spiritual life. If that is true then Job would not have needed the new birth. He could have walked in perfection from childhood on until adulthood.​

Shasta fails to understand the simple idea that people possess spiritual life at birth and the reason why all people need a new birth later is because when they sin they die spiritually. The following verse gives us an example of that:

"Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away" (2 Cor.3:6-7).​

Here the Apostle Paul is contrasting the New Testament with the Ten Commandments (written and engraved in stones). In regard to the New Testament he says that "the spirit giveth life" so this is obviously referring to "spiritual life."

We are told to compare "spiritual things with spiritual" (1 Cor.2:13) so in order to maintain a logical consistency we must understand that the "ministration of death" refers to "spiritual" death. There are many places in the Scriptures where we can see that it is our own sins which brings about spiritual death:

"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).​

"What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death...For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Ro.6:21,23).​

From all of this we can understand that a person does not emerge from the womb in a state described as being spiritually dead. If a person is born spiritually dead as a result of Adam's sin then it would be impossible for him to die spiritually as a result of his own sin. That is because a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually. The very definition of "death" demands that a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually: "the end of life" (Merriam-Webster.com.).

I understood what you meant Jerry. I just think your "simple idea" is dead wrong. There is a difference between a state of innocence and a state of being "dead in trespasses and sins" which can only happen when one sins against conscience. Ones state of innocence is like Adam's before he had any law. At that time he was not living in the spiritual death of his sins but neither had he realized the fullness of relationship with God he would enjoy when he could actively choose him. Children are not "dead in trespasses and sins" but neither are they automatically full of the Spirit at birth. The only person other than Jesus who was said to be "full of the Spirit" before birth was John the Baptist. From the account it is obvious that was an unusual event, an exception to the rule.

You are trying to find answers to certain theological questions you have. For that I commend you. The problem is it goes against theology that is clearly stated. When Jesus was dealing with Nicodemus' confusion about natural and spiritual birth Jesus said the following:

…5 Jesus answered “Truly, truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

Being born naturally is expressed as being born of water, which refers to amniotic fluid that accompanies our first birth. Jesus said that this is not enough, that we must also be born of the Spirit. So natural birth does not bring the life of the Spirit to us.

6 Flesh is born of flesh, but spirit is born of the Spirit. 7 Do not be amazed that I said, ‘You must be born again.’…
(John 3:5-6)

Jesus says that biological life begets (only) biological life. Spiritual life is what gives birth to Spiritual life. Succinctly putPhysical life CANNOT give birth to spiritual life. These two kinds of life have completely different origins and outcomes. The first birth being physical cannot generate an being that has spiritual life. This is the plainest and simplest way to exegete this verse.

If mankind were not affected by the Fall our human spirit would not be polluted or corrupted just uninhabited. However, this is not the case. The human spirit must not only be inhabited by the Holy Spirit it must be completely re-created if one is to be a spiritual man (Ezekiel 36:26-27).

Your claim that children are born of the Spirit can be disproven by the fact that children are not guided by the Holy Spirit. Without training, they do not produce godly character. Instead they "serve the desires of their flesh and mind" They must be taught to control their desires, delay self-gratification, to control their emotions and to be unselfish. These things would come to them naturally if they were guided and taught by the Holy Spirit.

The word nature in Greek is Fusis. It refers to the characteristic pattern of behavior which arises in a person of it's own accord that is, it does not have to be taught. What kind of character do these real life spirit filled toddlers and children have when their behavior arises of its own accord without intervention? Will they spontaneously exhibit the fruit of the spirit? Close your books and substitute teach a class of kindergarten children for about six months and explore what kind of behavior arises of its own accord.

Jesus Himself was born without any of the effects of the Fall which distinguished Him from all other humans. Any person who already is full of spiritual life from birth could choose to continue following the Spirit. I mean, if the Fall has no effect on the individual person then it is at least possible that sooner or later someone, for whatever reason, will simply continue to abide in the Spirit were born with. Absolutely nothing in your system prohibits that possibility. So if parents were to provide the right environment, bathing their child in prayer, perhaps they could grow to become a sinless boy and finally a sinless man. They would not need Jesus to redeem them. That is why I said your idea leads to Pelagianism.

The Bible shows sin to be universal and inevitable. Any doctrine of Christian anthropology must explain this. Did Jesus HAVE to be born of a Virgin to be sinless? Wouldn't it have been enough if he had simply been a son of Adam who never left His first estate? No, the virgin birth was essential to separate Him from the line of Adam.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

We can be self-willed, this thread is about leaving 'orthodox' views and only a person can do that and it is self-willed.

Let us look at the so-called Orthodox view here about what you call a person's self-will:

"From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI/4).​

If the Calvinists are right then God punishes mankind for doing the very things which He designed them to do:

"...the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds...unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil" (Ro.2:5-6,8-9).​

Frankly, according to my knowledge of the LORD of grace I cannot for the life of me imagine that He would design men to do things one way and then send them to hell for doing what He designed them to do.

On the other hand, I believe that a person emerges from the womb spiritually alive and it is his own actions which leads to him doing evil things. These words of Paul illustrates this truth:

"For I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me" (Ro.7:9-11).​

Paul is not speaking of "physical" death because he was alive physically when he wrote those words. He is speaking about breaking one of the Ten Commandments (v.7) and it was that which resulted in his "spiritual death."

In a commentary written by the faculty of Dallas Theological Seminary John A. Witmer writes, "As a result Paul 'died' spiritually (cf. 6:23a) under the sentence of judgment by the Law he had broken...so this sin deceived him...and 'put' him 'to death' (lit., 'killed' him), not physically but spiritually" (The Bible Knowledge Commentary; New Testament [Colorado Springs: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1983], 467).

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Likewise, death was described by the as a departure of this "animating principle" (or breath) so that when a person dies it was said that their "spirit" (or breath) "departed" or was "given up."

Just a couple of simple questions for you. What "death" is being referred to in these two verses in "bold":

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:17).​

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

 

[Jerry Shugart]

…5 Jesus answered “Truly, truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.

Being born naturally is expressed as being born of water, which refers to amniotic fluid that accompanies our first birth. Jesus said that this is not enough, that we must also be born of the Spirit.

In the same discourse the Lord Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be "born again." Since He was not referring to being born again physically then it is evident that He was speaking about being "born again of the Spirit."

That means that all people are born of the Spirit when they are conceived and therefore all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive.

 

[Shasta]

Just a couple of simple questions for you. What "death" is being referred to in these two verses in "bold":

"But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die" (Gen.2:17).​

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

As far as I understand it the first scripture Genesis 2:17 refers to spiritual death, that is, being separated from intimate fellowship with God. I think so because Adam did not die THAT day but 900+ years later.

The second verse (Ro.5:12) is speaking of physical death. Because of his sin, man lost fellowship with God. One judgment was that neither he nor any of his children were allowed access to the Tree of Life which would have given them physical immortality.

Sin was the cause of spiritual death. Not being in union with God made more sin inevitable since it is only through the Spirit that we can "mortify the deeds of the body" and live. Spiritual and physical death are distinct but interrelated.

 

[Shasta]

In the same discourse the Lord Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be "born again." Since He was not referring to being born again physically then it is evident that He was speaking about being "born again of the Spirit."

That means that all people are born of the Spirit when they are conceived and therefore all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive.

Jesus distinguished between the two kinds of birth. His remark "that which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" shows that PHYSICAL birth does not give rise to SPIRITUAL life. It is BECAUSE physical birth was inadequate that we need another SPIRITUAL kind of birth.

He did not say "that which is born of the flesh is spirit"

I am disappointed in you Jerry. Now you are so hung up on developing this new doctrine of yours that you cannot even do a simple exegesis of the scripture.

 

[Shasta]

Let us look at the so-called Orthodox view here about what you call a person's self-will:

"From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI/4).​

If the Calvinists are right then God punishes mankind for doing the very things which He designed them to do:

"...the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds...unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil" (Ro.2:5-6,8-9).​

Frankly, according to my knowledge of the LORD of grace I cannot for the life of me imagine that He would design men to do things one way and then send them to hell for doing what He designed them to do.

On the other hand, I believe that a person emerges from the womb spiritually alive and it is his own actions which leads to him doing evil things. These words of Paul illustrates this truth:

"For I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me" (Ro.7:9-11).​

Paul is not speaking of "physical" death because he was alive physically when he wrote those words. He is speaking about breaking one of the Ten Commandments (v.7) and it was that which resulted in his "spiritual death."

In a commentary written by the faculty of Dallas Theological Seminary John A. Witmer writes, "As a result Paul 'died' spiritually (cf. 6:23a) under the sentence of judgment by the Law he had broken...so this sin deceived him...and 'put' him 'to death' (lit., 'killed' him), not physically but spiritually" (The Bible Knowledge Commentary; New Testament [Colorado Springs: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1983], 467).

That is the view of Augustine and Calvin. I do not believe in that.

I understood some time ago that this whole doctrine of yours comes from Ro.7:9-11. I am also fairly sure that no one at DTS believes human being are alive spiritually until the first time they sin.

 

[glorydaz]

I agree. The scripture says plainly that Adam was given spiritual life in the day of his creation. We were meant to have a spirit in common with God who is a spirit being as well as the life of the soul which animals possess.

Sometimes I wonder if we are using the same terms. Man is spirit, soul, and body. 1 Thess. 5:23KJV Does God form a dead spirit in us?

Zechariah 12:1 The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.​

We "die" spiritually, when we first choose evil over good. That same spirit is then quickened when we are reunited with our Creator by the Gospel.


The spirit is that part of man which communicates with God.

Proverbs 20:27 The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord, searching all the inward parts of the belly.​

The question I have is does God form dead spirits in us because of Adam's sin? If so, why does the Lord Jesus say children rightfully make up the kingdom of heaven, and we must become like them?

 

[glorydaz]

Jesus distinguished between the two kinds of birth. His remark "that which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" shows that PHYSICAL birth does not give rise to SPIRITUAL life. It is BECAUSE physical birth was inadequate that we need another SPIRITUAL kind of birth.

He did not say "that which is born of the flesh is spirit"

I am disappointed in you Jerry. Now you are so hung up on developing this new doctrine of yours that you cannot even do a simple exegesis of the scripture.

This isn't a new doctrine of Jerry's. He and I have both been saying this for a long time. I'm sure it's a shock, but we are not alone. The early church fathers believed no such doctrine as original sin. There are quotes from them everywhere. Here's the first one I found when I looked under early church fathers. We see the same later with people like Finney. Google this stuff...it's out there. This attacking the messenger is getting really old. :nono:

Quotes from the old church fathers where they deny original sin / sinful nature

The pre-Nicene church fathers did not believe in the sinful nature

It’s not enough to go back to Luther, Calvin and Augustine to check the views of the early church, but we must go further back than that. If we do, we will soon notice that Luther and Calvin took impression of Augustine, and Augustine believed the contrary to the early church fathers before him – when it comes to the issue of the sinful nature and a number of other subjects.

It’s true that Adam’s sin affected us a great deal, because the ground is cursed due to him and we can’t reach the tree of life due to him, which means that his sin brought physical death on all his posterior (including Jesus before he rose again). We are bound by weakness, shame, fear, suffering and many natural shortcomings due to being related to Adam, but we certainly didn’t inherit his SIN. Romans 5:12 tells us that DEATH (not SIN) passed upon us BECAUSE all sinned. Not because Adam sinned. The physical death that we get due to Adam is not a punishment, but rather something that we get out of the mercy by the providence of God. The only other alternative would be to continue living on for ever without dying – in this present cursed world. That would be a cruel fate.

https://bjorkbloggen.com/2014/04/01...s-where-they-deny-original-sin-sinful-nature/

 

[glorydaz]

I suggest that you study transducianism, the theological concept that Nang brought up. It is one of two theories that explains how mankind's immaterial essence can be altered by the Fall. It is one of two ideas both of which have some support in scripture. If you think everyone is born spiritually and morally neutral then you are a Pelagian.

So when Jesus said we needed to become like little children, he was a Pelagian? :jawdrop:

 

[glorydaz]

Romans 5:14 is about death as being a consequence of the Fall which we inherit but do not necessarily earn by our own sins

1 John 5:17 is talking about a judgment that people bring on themselves by their personal sins

I do not see any "monkey wrench" here.

Then you don't see what I see. Why am I not surprised? We see kids differently, too.

 

[glorydaz]

Perhaps you can stop the drama long enough to follow the posting of Glorydaz and I.

She does not like the smell of TULIP, so I asked if she had read the Canons of Dordt. She had not, which I suspected. I then encouraged her and anyone to read the Canons of Dordt to get the full teaching of the five points of Calvinism.

Take it or leave it, the Canons of Dordt is an historic church document

Yeah, so is the book of Mormon, but I won't read that either.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The second verse (Ro.5:12) is speaking of physical death.

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

It is impossible that the "death" here is speaking about "physical" death. Men do not die physically because they sin. Instead, they die that way because the no longer have access to the very thing which would allow them to live for ever, the tree of life (Gen.3:22-24). Because of that all men are destined to die physically (Heb.9:27) and therefore they do not die physcially because they sin.

Of course Romans 5:12 is speaking about "spiritual" death. Just as Adam died spiritually as a result of his sin so also his descendants die spiritually when they sin. The Bible declares that the LORD is not a respecter of persons (Ro.2:11) so the LORD will not treat mankind in a different way than he treated Adam.

Since men die spiritually as a result of their own sin then it becomes obvious that a man has to be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually. Therefore, no one is born dead spiritually.

I am disappointed in you Jerry. Now you are so hung up on developing this new doctrine of yours that you cannot even do a simple exegesis of the scripture.

Perhaps you can clear up something for me. You said that the following verse speaks of two births, one a physical birth and the other a spiritual birth:

"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (Jn.3:5).​

So which of those births is the Lord Jesus speaking of here?:

"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" (Jn.3:3).​

Are you willing to argue that the Lord Jesus was referring to being born again physically? If not then the only birth left of which the Lord could have been speaking was being born again of the Spirit. And if one must be born of the Spirit AGAIN then that means that previously a person must have been born of the Spirit.

Do you agree with that?

I am also fairly sure that no one at DTS believes human being are alive spiritually until the first time they sin.

I never claimed anything of the sort. However, in a commentary written about Romans 7:9-11 John A. Witmer of DTS writes, "As a result Paul 'died' spiritually (cf. 6:23a) under the sentence of judgment by the Law he had broken...so this sin deceived him...and 'put' him 'to death' (lit., 'killed' him), not physically but spiritually" (The Bible Knowledge Commentary; New Testament [Colorado Springs: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1983], 467).

What John Witmer teaches there agrees with my contention that men die spiritually as a result of their own sin. To what death do you think Paul makes reference at Romans 7:9-11?

 

[intojoy]

So even though man is the image of God he is born spiritually dead?:

"For a man ought not to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man" (1 Cor.11:7).​

I was born dead to God but alive to the world, the flesh and Satan


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Shasta]

Sometimes I wonder if we are using the same terms. Man is spirit, soul, and body. 1 Thess. 5:23KJV Does God form a dead spirit in us?

Zechariah 12:1 The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.​

We "die" spiritually, when we first choose evil over good. That same spirit is then quickened when we are reunited with our Creator by the Gospel.


The spirit is that part of man which communicates with God.

Proverbs 20:27 The spirit of man is the candle of the Lord, searching all the inward parts of the belly.​

The question I have is does God form dead spirits in us because of Adam's sin? If so, why does the Lord Jesus say children rightfully make up the kingdom of heaven, and we must become like them?

Dead means inoperable. Alive means that it is active and performs the functions it was designed to do. In the NT a "spiritual person" is one who navigates through daily life with a functioning spirit. A person's spirit gives them such attributes as God consciousness, revelation of God's principles, and discernment. The soulish or natural man does not function in those areas. Children do not either, in my experience.

Let us consider the tabernacle which was a tri-partite structure that is comparable to us. We dwell in a tabernacle of flesh and have two immaterial parts called the soul and spirit. The innermost part was meant to be the meeting place between God and man. In us our human spirit is the part we have in common with God. Animals do not have spirits and so cannot commune and communicate with God.

Until someone is born of the Spirit they do not fellowship with God. Instead they are dominated by the desires of the flesh and mind. It is not enough, though, just to activate the spirit. It actually has to be remade. The fact that we need a new spiritual birth shows that the first birth was not enough to grant us spiritual life.


…5 Jesus answered “Truly, truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh is born of flesh, but spirit is born of the Spirit. 7 Do not be amazed that I said, ‘You must be born again.’…(John 3:5-6)

Our first birth was physical and gave rise to our physical life. The rebirth is spiritual and gives rise to spiritual life. Jesus distinguishes between these two kinds of births and two kinds of life. He had to make a clear distinction between the two for Nicodemus. Flesh is born of flesh means that physical birth begets physical life - not spiritual life which is why Nicodemus had to be born a second time, this time of the Spirit.

You were asking about God "forming" spirits. I do not think we are as God originally made us to be. God is also not in the business of creating new spirits for each person as they are conceived. I believe everything we are - body soul and spirit comes from our parents from the laws of reproduction which God included in man's biological design.

Children are innocent and are therefore not culpable for their actions. Because of this, there is no hostile enmity between them and God. Jesus commended children because they easily believe and for their simplicity. They are what they are and lack hypocrisy. We should be like children in some ways but definitely not in others.

 

[Lon]

Let us look at the so-called Orthodox view here about what you call a person's self-will:

"From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI/4).​

If the Calvinists are right then God punishes mankind for doing the very things which He designed them to do:

"...the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds...unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil" (Ro.2:5-6,8-9).​

Depending on which Calvinist you ask but for me: He is Sovereign. More: Nothing 'can' move without Him. Notice also, a good thing: This quote also gives verses you'd likely give also so they have to be embracing the same ones you do. As far as wrath, every Jack MAD and Open Theist that I know of believes in the doctrine of hell. Are you against this as well?

Frankly, according to my knowledge of the LORD of grace I cannot for the life of me imagine that He would design men to do things one way and then send them to hell for doing what He designed them to do.

Me neither. Some Calvinists do, not me. Rather, we are born as children of wrath, but Romans says it is 'through' Adam.
Genesis 3 puts the blame on the serpent as well.

On the other hand, I believe that a person emerges from the womb spiritually alive and it is his own actions which leads to him doing evil things. These words of Paul illustrates this truth:

"For I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me" (Ro.7:9-11).​

1) I don't think it helps anything to believe it, logically. A village is plagued with disease. If there were no way to save them, and the condition were fatal and contagious, we'd not hate or believe evil of the man who dropped the bomb. We are not to blame for our condition. We ARE to blame for going along with it once we realize that God has a 'different' nature or that we were made for better. That's the argument, I believe, from Romans.​

2) The Lord Jesus Christ told us it is 'what comes out of a man' that makes him unclean. Therefore the 'act' of sin comes from a nature, that sins. I know you disagree, I'm just trying to explain why it is against the biblically held view. It does trample scripture and scripture understanding. I'm not sure much more can be said. We can keep looking at scriptures one at a time, but this doctrine does negate a lot of statements from scripture, we take at face value. I think it enough to show the problem on a few, then allow either of us to choose which way we will go. For me, it is back to orthodox ground.

Paul is not speaking of "physical" death because he was alive physically when he wrote those words. He is speaking about breaking one of the Ten Commandments (v.7) and it was that which resulted in his "spiritual death."

Yes, but it is living death. He wasn't alive spiritually, he was just saying his mind held innocence/ignorance about it. It is like that village: The kids would live happily, though infected. If the parents don't tell them, they are 'free' and 'alive' because they are not in despair. Thus, 'alive' that Paul is talking about is 'ignorance' and or 'bliss.'

In a commentary written by the faculty of Dallas Theological Seminary John A. Witmer writes, "As a result Paul 'died' spiritually (cf. 6:23a) under the sentence of judgment by the Law he had broken...so this sin deceived him...and 'put' him 'to death' (lit., 'killed' him), not physically but spiritually" (The Bible Knowledge Commentary; New Testament [Colorado Springs: Chariot Victor Publishing, 1983], 467).

Yes, but Witmer isn't saying Paul was spiritually alive, rather he is saying 'sin' means spiritually dead already, but 'knowledge' of it ends carefree living. Again, life in this passage means 'ignorance' and 'bliss' not actual spiritual life.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes, but Witmer isn't saying Paul was spiritually alive, rather he is saying 'sin' means spiritually dead already, but 'knowledge' of it ends carefree living. Again, life in this passage means 'ignorance' and 'bliss' not actual spiritual life.

Witmer is saying that Paul died spiritually when he sinned. And common sense dictates that a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

Depending on which Calvinist you ask but for me: He is Sovereign.

Is that the reason why you defend the idea that the LORD makes men in such a way whereby they are wholly inclined to all evil and then He sends them to hell for doing the very thing which He designed them to do? I think that you have a warped idea concerning His sovereignty:

"This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all" (1 Jn.1:5).​