Antichrist

[bcbsr]

Nope. God knew about the Fall of man and planned for it.
You can build robots that love you, or for those you truely
love, you give them options to choose you or not. True
love allows other to make bad decisions. Your analysis
that bad decisions should not be allowed, is faulty.

You bear false witness against me. Where did I say that God didn't allow bad decisions to be made? I was talking about matters of justice. My experience in these forums is that the greatest weakness in the Christian community is the lack of basic reading comprehension skills.

 

[SkyWriting]

You bear false witness against me. Where did I say that God didn't allow bad decisions to be made? I was talking about matters of justice. My experience in these forums is that the greatest weakness in the Christian community is the lack of basic reading comprehension skills.

Ditto.
I offer you that lasts words on the subject!

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

The cars tendency to break down is not what causes the car to break down. If your operating the car with broken parts than it would have a tendency to break down but the broken parts is the cause.

The cause is irrelevant. Either it tends to break down, or it doesn't. If it never has broken down and you claim that it tends to break down, then you fib. That's all there is to it.

 

[Messenger 3k]

You're mistaken. Just being born with a sinful nature doesn't make one guilty of sin. Jesus didn't sin and therefore died as an innocent victim of unjustified suffering.

Jesus wasn't born with a sinful nature. Any rendering of the word "flesh" as sinful nature in regards to Jesus would be wrong. Jesus wasn't born of a man i.e, a corruptible seed, He was born of an incorruptible seed; the word of God (that especially went forth to Mary after which she conceived by the Holy Spirit).

We have all been born of a corruptible seed (man) hence the need to be born again by an incorruptible seed (our belief in Jesus Christ the word and receiving the Holy Spirit).

Think of it this way (I believe I can say this because we're all matured);
For a child to be born a man needs to implant his sperm (seed) in (through sexual relations with) a woman. In the case of Jesus, the man is the Holy Spirit (God); the seed is God's word to Mary telling her she would bear a child.

Since God and His word are incorruptible, the offspring Jesus is incorruptible.

 

[jamesbond007]

John writes of there being a plurality of antichrists

1John 2:18 Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come, by which we know that it is the last hour.

There is a semantic construct known as "par excellence". It's used for example in John 1:21 when John the Baptist was asked "Are you the Prophet?" While there are many prophets yet there was one in particular who was to come, which Peter in Acts 3 indicated was Jesus. So also while there have been many antichrists, there is yet one par excellence Antichrist who I would ague is yet to come. Though Preterists argue he already came, like the person of Nero or such.

We've had Obama as antichrist, Hillary as antichrist, Trump is antichrist and the Pope is antichrist and more. I'm not one to make predictions on this topic, but the prophecy seems to be holding.

 

[Serving Zion]

Thanks for sharing that observation! In English the "anti" only carries the meaning of being an opposite, but there is more knowledge in thinking of the substitution/replacement aspect.. when reading on where St John writes "Greater is the one who is in you", and seeing that Christians largely tend to fall into the world's way of thinking (eg Mark 10:42), it shows that a Christian who walks in the darkness, hiding from the light for fear his deeds be exposed, they are carnal, not living in the spirit. It is those ones who rail at dignities, denying and opposing even The Lord Himself when He speaks to them! (eg John 16:2, Matthew 23:34, 1 John 3:12). They, having believed deception that causes them to walk in darkness, have chosen to worship an idol (Isaiah 28:18) in place of the living spirit of God.

Do you think it is impossible or likely that the idea you presented in post #54, the par-excellent form, describes the spirit of the antichrist mentioned in 1 John 4:3 rather than a literal person?

 

[Dave L]

That's a different topic. The topic we had left off on was your proposition that though not sinning, not committing a crime one is reckoned guilty simply for being born with a sinful nature. What you're describing to me is injustice, that God is unjust, holding people accountable for things over which they have no control. But given that the scriptures indicate the God is just, such a theory is to be discarded.

God judged all guilty in Adam. And he judged all of Christ's children righteous in him. So what's the problem? We had Adam's sin. Now we have Christ's righteousness when we had nothing to do with either Adam's sin or Christ's righteousness.

 

[Serving Zion]

We had Adam's sin.

These words reflect a teaching that relies upon distorting scripture. "Inherited Sin" doctrine is heresy, part of antichrist's teaching. There is an appropriate discussion of that at this link: https://www.christianforums.com/thr...m-make-any-sense.8074177/page-6#post-72974573

 

[Dave L]

These words reflect a teaching that relies upon distorting scripture. "Inherited Sin" doctrine is heresy, part of antichrist's teaching. There is an appropriate discussion of that at this link: https://www.christianforums.com/thr...m-make-any-sense.8074177/page-6#post-72974573

“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:” (Romans 5:12)

 

[bcbsr]

God judged all guilty in Adam..

That's your interpretation, not mine.

 

[Dave L]

That's your interpretation, not mine.

Paul says you are wrong. Read Romans 5.

 

[bling]

The cause is irrelevant. Either it tends to break down, or it doesn't. If it never has broken down and you claim that it tends to break down, then you fib. That's all there is to it.

Saying someone has a sinful nature does not mean they sin. Since Adam and Eve did sin does that mean they had a tendency to sin or a sinful nature?
All humans have a tendency to fall while riding a bike and will most like fall at some time while riding, but some humans could through extreme measures avoid falling at any time, but because they are not that different from all other humans they have the same tendency ot nature.

 

[Small Fish]

Yes. I believe what Scripture teaches.

2 Corinthians 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Jesus was born with a earthly nature which had to eat, could be tempted as in the desert or wilderness and could die just like the rest of us. But He did not obey the urges of the flesh but overcame it so by His example we can do the same.

Luke 4:4
4 And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God.

 

[bcbsr]

Paul says you are wrong. Read Romans 5.

You must be misreading Romans 5.

 

[Dave L]

You must be misreading Romans 5.

“Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made [Greek = considered] sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made [Greek = considered] righteous.” (Romans 5:18–19)

 

[bcbsr]

“Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made [Greek = considered] sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made [Greek = considered] righteous.” (Romans 5:18–19)

The End Results of Adam & Christ's Actions

Rom 5:18,19 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

Note Paul's usage of the word "result". He's talking about the result, not the process. He's speaking by way of ellipsis with regards to the process. But what is the process, by implication?

ADAM'S SIN
leads to
A FALLEN HUMAN NATURE
leads to
PEOPLE SINNING
leads to
CONDEMNATION

But here he's simply pointing to the two ends speaking of the ultimate effect and not the process which led up to that effect.

The Augustinian heresy, as held by a number of sects of Christianity, came from a misinterpretation of these verses. Namely the idea that God holds people accountable for things over which they have no control. In this case they claim that God holds children accountable for the sins of their father, namely Adam. But as the Bible is clear that God is just and "Children shall not be put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin." Deut 24:16, therefore such an interpretation is unBiblical. Calvinists largely discard God's judicial nature when interpreting the Bible rather than interpreting the Bible in light of God's judicial nature.

Classical Calvinists, like John Gill, hold to an Augustinian theory. Note how he interprets these verses, "though the posterity of Adam are habitually sinners, that is, derive corrupt nature from Adam, yet this is not meant here; but that they are become guilty, through the imputation of his sin to them; for it is by the disobedience of another they are made sinners, which must be by the imputation of that disobedience to them; he sinned, and they sinned in him, when they had as yet no actual existence; which could be no other way, than by imputation, as he was reckoned and accounted their head and representative, and they reckoned and accounted in him, and so have sinned in him."

Thus such people hold that God holds people accountable for things of which they hadn't actually done wrong, things of which they had no control over, things that occurred even before they were born. That is not justice. That is prejudice. That is injustice. And consequently such a view is anti-Biblical, anti-Christlike. Not only this but they interpret other passages to indicate that God imputes guilt to Christ, which is contrary to God's character.

"Have nothing to do with a false charge and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty." Ex 23:7

"Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent— the LORD detests them both." Pr 17:15

As such, God detests Calvinism. Consequently any interpretation which compromises God's judicial nature or any of God's character is to be discarded, and those who hold such interpretations to be discredited as those who portray a false image of God.

Made Sinners versus Made Righteous

The many being "made" sinners is speaking of the result, not the process. And note that he's not saying the God makes us sinners, but rather that through Adam's disobedience we ended up as sinners.

There are those who misinterpret Rom 5:18,19 to mean that a person is made into a sinner in the exact same way that a person is made righteous. Now the Bible teaches us that the way a person is made righteous is that he is first of all justified, forgiven of sin, through faith in the blood of Christ. Such a person is reckoned guiltless. Then, having been saved, and his destiny secure, for God "set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come." 2Cor 5:5, the Holy Spirit then coerces him into doing what is right. Thus righteous behavior is characteristic of those born of God. In fact "Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God" 1John 3:10a Because doing what is right is in the nature of those born of God.

But there are those who claim that people become sinners in a similar manner, namely God first reckons guilt to them and then gives them a sinful nature which leads to unrighteous behavior. That's like portraying God as reckoning guilt to the innocent and then putting them in jail so that the environment there would cause them to become bad people. Obviously such a portrayal makes God out to be unjust, and indeed they will admit that in their theology "God is unjust, in human terms". (In fact if God were unjust in this way then Christ wouldn't have had to die. For Christ's death appeased God's judicial nature. But if God reckoned guilt prejudicially, he could have just as well forgiven sin prejudicially, without having to appease his judicial nature if indeed he had no judicial nature to begin with. The Augustinian heresy denigrates God's character.)

Rather the process goes like this:

Adam past down a sinful nature
People are guilty when they comply with that nature
Having then sinned, they are condemned

Christ died for sins.
When they come to faith in Christ, people are forgiven of sin
Having been justified, they are born of God, given the Holy Spirit
The new nature coerces them into righteous living.

So while Paul was making an analogy between the end effects of what Adam did to what Christ did, how each led to the end effect was different. Thus one should not read too much into these verses of how these end effects came about. Among the hermeneutical errors Calvinists make in this whole section is to take it out of the context of what Paul had already stated in the first four and a half chapters of Romans, and to read too much into the analogy Paul is making without interpreting it in light of God's character.

 

[Dave L]

The End Results of Adam & Christ's Actions

Rom 5:18,19 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men. For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

Note Paul's usage of the word "result". He's talking about the result, not the process. He's speaking by way of ellipsis with regards to the process. But what is the process, by implication?

ADAM'S SIN
leads to
A FALLEN HUMAN NATURE
leads to
PEOPLE SINNING
leads to
CONDEMNATION

But here he's simply pointing to the two ends speaking of the ultimate effect and not the process which led up to that effect.

The Augustinian heresy, as held by a number of sects of Christianity, came from a misinterpretation of these verses. Namely the idea that God holds people accountable for things over which they have no control. In this case they claim that God holds children accountable for the sins of their father, namely Adam. But as the Bible is clear that God is just and "Children shall not be put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin." Deut 24:16, therefore such an interpretation is unBiblical. Calvinists largely discard God's judicial nature when interpreting the Bible rather than interpreting the Bible in light of God's judicial nature.

Classical Calvinists, like John Gill, hold to an Augustinian theory. Note how he interprets these verses, "though the posterity of Adam are habitually sinners, that is, derive corrupt nature from Adam, yet this is not meant here; but that they are become guilty, through the imputation of his sin to them; for it is by the disobedience of another they are made sinners, which must be by the imputation of that disobedience to them; he sinned, and they sinned in him, when they had as yet no actual existence; which could be no other way, than by imputation, as he was reckoned and accounted their head and representative, and they reckoned and accounted in him, and so have sinned in him."

Thus such people hold that God holds people accountable for things of which they hadn't actually done wrong, things of which they had no control over, things that occurred even before they were born. That is not justice. That is prejudice. That is injustice. And consequently such a view is anti-Biblical, anti-Christlike. Not only this but they interpret other passages to indicate that God imputes guilt to Christ, which is contrary to God's character.

"Have nothing to do with a false charge and do not put an innocent or honest person to death, for I will not acquit the guilty." Ex 23:7

"Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent— the LORD detests them both." Pr 17:15

As such, God detests Calvinism. Consequently any interpretation which compromises God's judicial nature or any of God's character is to be discarded, and those who hold such interpretations to be discredited as those who portray a false image of God.

Made Sinners versus Made Righteous

The many being "made" sinners is speaking of the result, not the process. And note that he's not saying the God makes us sinners, but rather that through Adam's disobedience we ended up as sinners.

There are those who misinterpret Rom 5:18,19 to mean that a person is made into a sinner in the exact same way that a person is made righteous. Now the Bible teaches us that the way a person is made righteous is that he is first of all justified, forgiven of sin, through faith in the blood of Christ. Such a person is reckoned guiltless. Then, having been saved, and his destiny secure, for God "set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come." 2Cor 5:5, the Holy Spirit then coerces him into doing what is right. Thus righteous behavior is characteristic of those born of God. In fact "Anyone who does not do what is right is not a child of God" 1John 3:10a Because doing what is right is in the nature of those born of God.

But there are those who claim that people become sinners in a similar manner, namely God first reckons guilt to them and then gives them a sinful nature which leads to unrighteous behavior. That's like portraying God as reckoning guilt to the innocent and then putting them in jail so that the environment there would cause them to become bad people. Obviously such a portrayal makes God out to be unjust, and indeed they will admit that in their theology "God is unjust, in human terms". (In fact if God were unjust in this way then Christ wouldn't have had to die. For Christ's death appeased God's judicial nature. But if God reckoned guilt prejudicially, he could have just as well forgiven sin prejudicially, without having to appease his judicial nature if indeed he had no judicial nature to begin with. The Augustinian heresy denigrates God's character.)

Rather the process goes like this:

Adam past down a sinful nature
People are guilty when they comply with that nature
Having then sinned, they are condemned

Christ died for sins.
When they come to faith in Christ, people are forgiven of sin
Having been justified, they are born of God, given the Holy Spirit
The new nature coerces them into righteous living.

So while Paul was making an analogy between the end effects of what Adam did to what Christ did, how each led to the end effect was different. Thus one should not read too much into these verses of how these end effects came about. Among the hermeneutical errors Calvinists make in this whole section is to take it out of the context of what Paul had already stated in the first four and a half chapters of Romans, and to read too much into the analogy Paul is making without interpreting it in light of God's character.

Your interpretation results in salvation by works. We are saved by Christ's imputed righteousness (not our own) just as we were lost by Adam's imputed unrighteousness (not our own).

 

[bcbsr]

Your interpretation results in salvation by works. We are saved by Christ's imputed righteousness (not our own) just as we were lost by Adam's imputed unrighteousness (not our own).

Nope. Non Sequitor. It doesn't follow.

I've already mentioned the implications of your interpretation, which you haven't denied.

 

[Dave L]

Nope. Non Sequitor. It doesn't follow.

I've already mentioned the implications of your interpretation, which you haven't denied.

You cannot receive Christ's righteousness any other way than by imputation. And this balances the way you received Adam's unrighteousness - by imputation.

Infants who never consciously sin die because of Adam's imputed sin. The wages of sin is death.

 

[Heart2Soul]

In contrast the "sinful nature" in scripture is viewed as an entity that influences one's behavior. So by "sinful nature" I'm referring to something different that what you're referring to.

"I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do— this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it." Rom 7:18-20

"the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want." Gal 5:17

If the Spirit is an entity, which it is, so is the sinful nature.

You do make a good point...for without the sinful nature of the flesh Satan would not have attempted to tempt Him....temptation enters through the flesh.