Arminianism is inconsistent

[Hammster]

I am not sure. I do know that EVERY life owes a death at some point.

The reason for that is sin. So babies die because of sin. We all have Adam's sin imputed to us.

 

[dogs4thewin]

The reason for that is sin. So babies die because of sin. We all have Adam's sin imputed to us.

What did babies do?

 

[Hammster]

What did babies do?

They were born under the curse of sin.

 

[dogs4thewin]

They were born under the curse of sin.

So was everyone but some live for over 100 years and some are hours old or even stillborn.

 

[Hammster]

So was everyone but some live for over 100 years and some are hours old or even stillborn.

Yes, this is true. All are but a vapor, though.

 

[twin1954]

What did babies do?

This thread might interest you. It answers the question you asked.

http://www.christianforums.com/thre...-in-christ-if-we-did-not-sin-in-adam.7845157/

 

[John Robie]

The reason for that is sin. So babies die because of sin. We all have Adam's sin imputed to us.

What he said.

 

[twin1954]

If we didn't sin in Adam we can't be saved in Christ. In exactly the same way that Adam's sin was imputed to us through natural generation the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us through spiritual generation. We became sinners by the act of one man and we can only be saved by the acts of one Man. As Adam was our Federal Head and plunged us all into death and sin the Lord Jesus Christ is our Federal Head and all who are in Him are justified and saved to live eternally with Him. The Lord Jesus Christ is called the last Adam. 1Cor. 15:45

 

[OzSpen]

Using a blog article in an online discussion is lazy. I could just post a link to counter. But I can tell that you are more interested in your view than the truth. The proof being that you not only used Titus 2:11 as a proof text, you couldn't even post the whole sentence.

I don't have much time anymore for online discussions. And you have shown you're unwilling to listen anyway. So have a great day and be blessed.

John,

It is not lazy. I could do a copy and paste to demonstrate my response to what you said.

To say that I am more interested in my view than truth is false. I've defended truth on CF.com for 10 years and 9,500 posts and you want to tell me you know my views after 9 months and 620 posts. I don't think you've been exposed to my view on truth, but you have jumped to an unwarranted conclusion.

I used Titus 2:11 for exegesis and exposition and not as a proof text.

I most certainly am willing to listen to anyone who does not misrepresent what I say.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

I disagree but due to Baptist forum SOF I'm not allowed to discuss. On this I'm firmly in the Lutheran camp. So I stated it in a specific way that doesn't go against Scripture and the Baptist SOF.

I'm fine with your disagreement, but you ignore what Peter said, unless your telling me he was wrong.

To which particular verses by Peter are you referring that you are intimating that I might disagree?

 

[mikedsjr]

ugh.....My last statement...i tried not to be....sounds a bit more accusatory than i wanted. I think it an overall issue i have. I ask questions in a negative than a positive light. Anyway, just a sidenote that I should have asked it a bit differently.

Anyway, Acts 2:38. Peter said, "repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins" to the question, "What should we do?" What relation do you view Peter's statement and Jesus' statement in Matt 28?

 

[OzSpen]

ugh.....My last statement...i tried not to be....sounds a bit more accusatory than i wanted. I think it an overall issue i have. I ask questions in a negative than a positive light. Anyway, just a sidenote that I should have asked it a bit differently.

Anyway, Acts 2:38. Peter said, "repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of sins" to the question, "What should we do?" What relation do you view Peter's statement and Jesus' statement in Matt 28?

Do you want 5-10 different explanations? I don't have the time to engage in such.

Renowned Greek exegete, the late F F Bruce, wrote of Acts 2:38,

It would, of course, be a mistake to link the words 'unto the remission of your sins' with the command 'be baptized' to the exclusion of the prior command 'Repent ye.' It is against the whole genius of Biblical religion to suppose that the outward rite had any value except insofar as it was accompanied by true repentance within. In a similar passage in the following chapter, the blotting out of the people's sins is a direct consequence of their repenting and turning to God (Ch. 3:19); nothing is said here about baptism, although it is no doubt implied (the idea of an unbaptized Christian is simply not entertained in NT (Bruce 1979:77).

Oz

Works consulted
Bruce, F F 1979. Commentary on the Book of Acts. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

 

[mikedsjr]

Do you want 5-10 different explanations? I don't have the time to engage in such.

Renowned Greek exegete, the late F F Bruce, wrote of Acts 2:38,


Oz

Works consulted
Bruce, F F 1979. Commentary on the Book of Acts. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

So you believe Peter was wrong to include baptism in 2:38?

I read 2:38 and 3:19 and say "yes, I agree this is correct with both as true"

 

[OzSpen]

So you believe Peter was wrong to include baptism in 2:38?

I read 2:38 and 3:19 and say "yes, I agree this is correct with both as true"

I've already given you my answer.

 

[Skala]

I do not find a word in Scripture that says that free will was forfeited when Adam sinned. This I do read: 'Choose this day whom you will serve' (Joshua 24:15).

I don't find a word in scripture where free will is established IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Man has the ability to make choices, yes, but that's not the same as saying his will is "Free". The Bible clearly teaches that man makes decisions based on his nature (whether fallen and unregenerate, or renewed by the Spirit/regenerate)

Your entire theology is predicated on the concept of free will when no such thing was ever established in scripture. You just assume it's true and go from there.

 

[Bluelion]

I don't find a word in scripture where free will is established IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Man has the ability to make choices, yes, but that's not the same as saying his will is "Free". The Bible clearly teaches that man makes decisions based on his nature (whether fallen and unregenerate, or renewed by the Spirit/regenerate)

Your entire theology is predicated on the concept of free will when no such thing was ever established in scripture. You just assume it's true and go from there.

He just gave the word of God where it says choose who you will serve. How do you explain over and over again God says choose?

 

[OzSpen]

I don't find a word in scripture where free will is established IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Man has the ability to make choices, yes, but that's not the same as saying his will is "Free". The Bible clearly teaches that man makes decisions based on his nature (whether fallen and unregenerate, or renewed by the Spirit/regenerate)

Your entire theology is predicated on the concept of free will when no such thing was ever established in scripture. You just assume it's true and go from there.

Your charge against me is false when you claim my 'entire theology' is predicated on the concept of 'free will'. You and I have never sat down to go through my 'entire theology'. Your statement is an hyperbole and its false in regard to my theology.

I consider that the will has been FREED according to Scriptures such as Titus 2:11 (ESV), 'For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people'.

I suggest you get your facts correct before making accusations against me like this.

Oz

 

[Skala]

He just gave the word of God where it says choose who you will serve. How do you explain over and over again God says choose?

Bluelion, in the verse you quoted, what is given as the list of options to choose between?

 

[Bluelion]

Bluelion, in the verse you quoted, what is given as the list of options to choose between?

seems pretty clear to me who you will serve

 

[John Robie]

seems pretty clear to me who you will serve

I think the point Skala is making is the the choice isn't what you think it is.

14 "Now therefore fear the LORD and serve him in sincerity and in faithfulness. Put away the gods that your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the LORD.
15 And if it is evil in your eyes to serve the LORD, choose this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your fathers served in the region beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD." - Joshua 24:14-15

The choice is which false god will they serve?