Calvinist Robots

[JacktheCatholic]

Nowhere does it say that children are without sin.

Children are born into sin as we all are. Original sin is bad...

But Jesus is good and baptism allows us all to be born again with out Original Sin or any other blemish. Too bad we all like to play in the dirt.

 

[MamaZ]

Children are born into sin as we all are. Original sin is bad...

But Jesus is good and baptism allows us all to be born again with out Original Sin or any other blemish. Too bad we all like to play in the dirt.

So if when you are baptised in water you believe that that the original sin is washed away? That then you are are without sin at all and it is now your choice if you sin or not?

 

[JacktheCatholic]

So if when you are baptised in water you believe that that the original sin is washed away? That then you are are without sin at all and it is now your choice if you sin or not?

I do not hold to theologies like the Baptists where baptism is only water. In the theology I subscribe to baptism is water and Spirit and it is a rebirth.

 

[chestertonrules]

So if when you are baptised in water you believe that that the original sin is washed away? That then you are are without sin at all and it is now your choice if you sin or not?

Of course it is our choice.

God's grace will help us if we seek it.

Grace has intervened in our lives. We now accept or reject it.

My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and he is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.
1 John 2:1-2

 

[PETE_]

But Paul tells us that no one seeks God

 

[chestertonrules]

But Paul tells us that no one seeks God

Not without God's grace, true.

Luckily, Jesus died to atone for the sins of the whole world and to draw us to God.

Jesus is standing at the door and knocking.

God's grace reaches out to all men. We must respond to this grace, pick up our cross, and follow.

 

[JacktheCatholic]

But Paul tells us that no one seeks God

I am sorry... I do not know where in scripture you are referring to???

 

[PETE_]

10 as it is written:
n “ None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.
Ro 3:9-11​

 

[JacktheCatholic]

10 as it is written:

n“ None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;
no one seeks for God.

Ro 3:9-11​

Isn't Paul making a point by quoting from known Jewish writings concerning sin?

 

[squint]

The whole context of Peter's vision was showing him tha it was no longer taboo for him to associate with those that were not clean

Associate? Peter was advised directly by God to call NO MAN common or unclean. The presumption I put into play here for you Calvinists who (perhaps ROBOTICALLY) call your fellow mankind TOTALLY DEPRAVED is that this would appear to be a direct violation of what Peter was shown by God, in addition to the other scripture from TITUS 3:2 where 'we' are to speak EVIL of NO MAN, and calling them TOTALLY DEPRAVED (perhaps ROBOTICALLY) would appear to be a violation of that as well.

You know...Totally Depraved = EVIL
Totally Depraved = COMMON and UNCLEAN

The term would appear to me to be a blatant violation, in addition to many many other scriptures that I have not employed YET...such as 2 Cor. 5:19, or Romans 2:1 for 'starters.'

Bring the robotic drones before me!

enjoy!

squint

 

[squint]

It's just one evasion after the other.

It's as if being able to choose a brand of toothpaste while on our predetermined road to hell is relevant.

He has no relevant point to refute.

And let's pick up this (potentially ROBOTIC) view as well:

That IF we do not (in some form) VALIDATE what transpired @ the Cross/Resurrection by our 'concession' 'acceptance' 'activation' THEN the entirety of the events were WORTHLESS?

Is this your final DRONE?

enjoy!

squint

 

[PETE_]

Associate? Peter was advised directly by God to call NO MAN common or unclean. The presumption I put into play here for you Calvinists who (perhaps ROBOTICALLY) call your fellow mankind TOTALLY DEPRAVED is that this would appear to be a direct violation of what Peter was shown by God, in addition to the other scripture from TITUS 3:2 where 'we' are to speak EVIL of NO MAN, and calling them TOTALLY DEPRAVED (perhaps ROBOTICALLY) would appear to be a violation of that as well.

You know...Totally Depraved = EVIL
Totally Depraved = COMMON and UNCLEAN

The term would appear to me to be a blatant violation, in addition to many many other scriptures that I have not employed YET...such as 2 Cor. 5:19, or Romans 2:1 for 'starters.'

Bring the robotic drones before me!

enjoy!

squint

You sound like all the people that throw out "judge not lest ye be judged" as saying we should not judge people, when the Bible tells us to do just that in other passages. Pointing out that men are evil by nature is not what the passages is describing

 

[PETE_]

Isn't Paul making a point by quoting from known Jewish writings concerning sin?

That sin nature is why we do not seek God

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

10 as it is written:n“ None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands;no one seeks for God.​

Ro 3:9-11

Only One is righteous enough to Judge

This form of #1342 used 20 times, including 2 times in Revelation

http://www.scripture4all.org/

Roman 3:10 According as it has been written 'that not is righteous-one/dikaioV <1342> not-yet one'

Textus Rec.) Romans 3:10 kaqwV gegraptai oti ouk estin dikaioV oude eiV

Reve 16:5 and I hear of the Messenger the waters saying "rightouus-one/dikaioV <1342> [*Lord] Thou are, the One being and the One was [*and] the pious One, that these Thou judged.

 

[Evergreen48]

You did not answer my question.

Ephesians 1:3. " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4. According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:"

Which world: the 'oikoumene' or the 'kosmos' ?

Kosmos.

So we were not chosen in Him before the foundation of this earth (oikoumene), but before the foundation of the kosmos . Which 'world' do you think was the first world founded, the 'oikoumene' or the 'kosmos' ?

It would mean that they are partly 'righteous' and partly 'unrighteous'. Or that they are capable of doing at least some righteous things, and that they are not TOTALLY ruined. Agree?

You are either fully righteous or you are fully not righteous for if you break even one of the laws you break all of them.
This is why our righteousness is as filthy rags unto the Lord and we carry not our own righteousness but the righteousness of Christ Jesus.

If keeping all of the law does not make us righteous, (and it doesn't, because for one thing, we are not under, nor have we ever been under the law that James 2:10 is referring to) then breaking part or all of it would not make us unrighteous. You are using Isaiah 64:6 out of its context. Our righteousness is not as filthy rags unto the Lord. He knows the intent of the heart and mind, and in due season we shall reap a due reward.

Galations 6: 7. Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9. And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.

I do not have the desire to sin. It is the sin that dwells within a man that tempts him. I have the desire to be all that God wants me to be through Him. My desire is for the Lord.

By your own admission, "But sometimes out of my mouth comes sin at its best.. " One cannot sin unless there is first the desire to do so. So your desire is not always for the Lord.

Have you not experienced being born again?
Our hearts are circumcised with the Spirit of God . He is the one who causes us to walk in His way. He gives us the desire of His heart through His Spirit.

I don't remember any such 'experience' as this. But then I don't remember experiencing my natural birth either. But here I am, so I guess I must have had that experience at least.

John 3:8 "The Spirit breathes where it will. You hear the sound of it but cannot tell from where it is coming or where it is going. So is every one who has been born of the Spirit."

So, here I am feeling and hearing that Spirit breathing on me. So even though I don't remember it, or really know when it was happening, surely I must have been born from above at sometime or another.

 

[Evergreen48]

Nowhere does it say that children are without sin.

It is not directly said that children are without sin, but indirectly said. As a 'candidate' for the kingdom of heaven either must be sinless or have had their sins cleansed from them and remembered no more. There is no sin in the kingdom of heaven.

Do children, even infants, sin as in how Augustine of Hippo illustrated it?

No.

Justified jealously; that is, when there is a valid reason for jealousy, is not a sin against God. And so far as that child saw, his sibling was a threat to his relationship with his mother.

"To him that knows to do good and does it not, to him it is sin."

Do you think He might've been referring to their helplessness?
After all, He was rebuking apostles for exclusionist behavior.
The association with of the kingdom with children was not in the context of a discussion on original sin:

Mark 10:13-16 13 And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. 15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. 16 And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them. The remark was in reference to their vulnerability, it had no positive inference about their character. Jesus was rebuking apostles for exclusivist behavior.

Matthew 18:1. "At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?
2. And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
3. And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted (strepho - to twist, i.e. turn quite around - ) and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."

I don't see how there could be any misunderstanding about what Jesus was saying in this passage of scripture.

Where did Jesus ever discuss original sin?

 

[squint]

You sound like all the people that throw out "judge not lest ye be judged"

That is a 'natural' first reaction, BUT if I was a thinking man I may want to examine evidence before firing off guesses.

as saying we should not judge people, when the Bible tells us to do just that in other passages.

Ah, very good. You DO see that B O T H positions are as they say 'in vogue?'

It may be incumbent under that reality for harmony of B O T H presentations then?

Pointing out that men are evil by nature is not what the passages is describing

First of all, you have NOT met me on the ground of comparison of the scriptures provided to the (potentially ROBOTIC) conveyance of TOTAL DEPRAVITY.

Secondly, to defer to what you THINK I may be referring to when we haven't even gotten to THAT POINT yet may be jumping the gun as they say.

The inference you make that contains the fault is the term (again) EVIL men. Mankind does indeed carry EVIL with us. What this does NOT mean is that the EVIL is of ONLY MANKIND. Do you understand that mankind is not alone in these events of EVIL? And if so and if true, then where is your accounting for the OTHER PARTIES of these matters?

This is only food for 'thinking judges.'

enjoy!

squint

 

[PETE_]

First of all, you have NOT met me on the ground of comparison of the scriptures provided to the (potentially ROBOTIC) conveyance of TOTAL DEPRAVITY.


squint

I was just trying to address your statement about calling men evil but it is off topic for this thread and you continue to throw in the little insulting jabs of "ROBOTIC" that do nothing for civil discussion, so I will just leave it alone.

 

[Evergreen48]

I was just trying to address your statement about calling men evil but it is off topic for this thread and you continue to throw in the little insulting jabs of "ROBOTIC" that do nothing for civil discussion, so I will just leave it alone.

A wise decision on your part, Pete.

 

[chestertonrules]

That IF we do not (in some form) VALIDATE what transpired @ the Cross/Resurrection by our 'concession' 'acceptance' 'activation' THEN the entirety of the events were WORTHLESS?

That's not what the bible or the Catholic Church teaches.

1 Tim 4
9This is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance 10(and for this we labor and strive), that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe.


From the catechism:

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:
Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.[337]