Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Adam was created, Christ was born and the regenerate man is spirit, soul and body. Remove the spirit and what are you left with? Soul and body only. The unregenerate man is called "psuchikos" for a reason (1Cor.2:14).So you say. What spirit does unregenerate man have?
Except when you begin with the wrong premise.Conclusion: Least common denominator! Yay! I always like it when a logical progression brings a simple conclusion!
Repeat your whole thesis. It is replete with such. I'm not going to bother. Too much else to tend to.And yet you give no examples so how am I meant to respond?
Take that statement literally. At face value. Go with it.There is a spirit of 'self' and a spirit of God.
I never said they were the same thing and I'm pretty sure I explained this earlier but in case I am remembering incorrectly ... Our spirit is immortal ie. not subject to death because it is born of God the Holy Spirit. If it cannot die, it therefore also cannot decay or be destroyed in any way hence it's immortality guarantees incorruptibility, not subject to decay.In 1 Co 15, the words "mortal" and "corruptible" not only do not mean the same thing, they also do not mean "immoral,"
"mortal" mean subject to death,
"corruptible" (phthora) means subject to decay, not subject to immorality, which word is kapeleuo.
As astute and knowledgeable as you are ... it's rather amazing or unamazing that these General Theology threads continue for sooo looong with seemingly little if anything really accomplished other than to confirm what we still think is correct after 14 pages.Conclusion: Least common denominator! Yay! I always like it when a logical progression brings a simple conclusion! (Small side note: I'm guessing when that happens, the logical progression is usually by way of negating what the conclusion is NOT. (That is, we find ourselves sometimes whittling away at human concepts to find the truth).)
Anyhow, yes! You come to the same conclusion as what I speculated, by a different route. Thus, @sawdust would do well to take note, that what I said (that I don't know of scriptural warrant to prove it) does not mean there is none, in spite of his crowing (post #246). You just showed the warrant.
By choosing rather than self to think of others. It comes with the realization self interest is what is wrong with mankind. Discover a teaching by a 2000 year old man that mirrors that... bonus.How can self, then, in any way, induce Regeneration or Salvation?
As astute and knowledgeable as you are ... it's rather amazing or unamazing that these General Theology threads continue for sooo looong with seemingly little if anything really accomplished other than to confirm what we still think is correct after 14 pages.
When is the last time anyone has said something to the affect, "You know you're right. I thought my vision was clear when it was actually distorted." Even if that thought entered our mind human pride might stand in the way to admit to another "born again" Christian their vision was better.
Thanks for the kind words. . .I replied about "born again" in this thread or another thread in response to a post by Clare73. However, her reply to me seemed evasive and seemed to come across as "who does he think he is suggesting a theology that we've never heard or rarely, if ever, put forward before".
IMO the posts by Clare73 in these CF forums are well-expressed with sound Biblical support so was interested how she might reply as a "born again" Christian ... however was disappointed - at first. In hindsight it would have taken too much time for her to have digested and thoughtfully responded. Many, maybe all, would agree that we don't take enuf time to digest the merit of each others posts and too quick to find reason to disagree. Such is the haste of today's Christianity
Here's something that many Christians are undecided or believe what their church teaches ...
For those that believe Paul (after his conversion) still did the things he knew he shouldn't do (sin) and didn't do the things he knew he should do (Romans 7:14-25). How do Christians justify they are "Born Again" if they are still sinning. Yet that is what the majority of so-called Christians are led to believe that "born again" Christians still go on sinning. Actually Paul was referring to himself sinning before he was confronted by his Lord and Saviour and became a new man in Christ.
And how can man at enmity with God do that without having his mind and heart changed by God?By choosing rather than self to think of others. It comes with the realization self interest is what is wrong with mankind. Discover a teaching by a 2000 year old man that mirrors that... bonus.
There are many non Christians out there that can look at the state of the world and figure out the cause behind it. They then pursue how to reverse it and make a utopia out of it. Judaism and Christianity takes away a lot of the work I agree.And how can man at enmity with God do that without having his mind and heart changed by God?
You have a point. And 'comprehensive' theological books are thick. Even sound arguments are never thorough on one point. Nobody has the time.As astute and knowledgeable as you are ... it's rather amazing or unamazing that these General Theology threads continue for sooo looong with seemingly little if anything really accomplished other than to confirm what we still think is correct after 14 pages.
When is the last time anyone has said something to the affect, "You know you're right. I thought my vision was clear when it was actually distorted." Even if that thought entered our mind human pride might stand in the way to admit to another "born again" Christian their vision was better.
I replied about "born again" in this thread or another thread in response to a post by Clare73. However, her reply to me seemed evasive and seemed to come across as "who does he think he is suggesting a theology that we've never heard or rarely, if ever, put forward before".
IMO the posts by Clare73 in these CF forums are well-expressed with sound Biblical support so was interested how she might reply as a "born again" Christian ... however was disappointed - at first. In hindsight it would have taken too much time for her to have digested and thoughtfully responded. Many, maybe all, would agree that we don't take enuf time to digest the merit of each others posts and too quick to find reason to disagree. Such is the haste of today's Christianity
THE cause, or a cause? Not sure what you are saying here.There are many non Christians out there that can look at the state of the world and figure out the cause behind it. They then pursue how to reverse it and make a utopia out of it. Judaism and Christianity takes away a lot of the work I agree.
The Spirit of which the regenerated are born, is eternal God. The life given to man, Salvation, is everlasting, but not without beginning as far as the fact that we are begun. Yet its nature too, is OF eternal God. The Elect are IN CHRIST. Flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone. (Just wait and see!)Except when you begin with the wrong premise.
Being born of God means being spiritually alive. It does not mean having eternal life. The two are completely different things. The first is a generation of life the latter a gifting of life.
That which is born of the Spirit = something being produced and that which is being produced is spirit not eternal life.
Did you see post #276?Except when you begin with the wrong premise.
Being born of God means being spiritually alive. It does not mean having eternal life. The two are completely different things. The first is a generation of life the latter a gifting of life.
That which is born of the Spirit = something being produced and that which is being produced is spirit not eternal life.
I know that Mark, the Spirit is God, eternal life, but it is spirit that is born of Him, not eternal life. I'm not saying we don't have eternal life. It simply isn't being given to us in the John 3:3 passage that speaks of being born from above.The Spirit of which the regenerated are born, is eternal God. The life given to man, Salvation, is everlasting, but not without beginning as far as the fact that we are begun. Yet its nature too, is OF eternal God. The Elect are IN CHRIST. Flesh of his flesh and bone of his bone. (Just wait and see!)
I think you are confusing things by using the wrong terms. Adam was immortal when he was created but this was not eternal life. What Adam had when he was created was innocence rather than salvation. He had no corruption rather than being incorruptible.This issue was raised in another thread that I didn't get a chance to respond to as I went on holidays and it was off topic so thought I would deal with it here and see what you all have to say for yourselves.
I say he didn't as eternal life is imputed to our spirit and if Adam had eternal life he could not have died spiritually. It's also the reason we don't die even though we sin. You can't perish (spiritually) and have eternal life at the same time.
John 3:15
that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.
What say you?
I read them.Did you see post #271 and #276?
1) Since after the fall Adam was definitely not a son of God in the sense of Jn 1:12-13, therefore, Adam was not a son of God before the fall, because sons of God never lose sonship.
So are you now saying Jn.3:3 is not the giving of eternal life? If so, what is being born?Rebirth is simply the second (spiritual) birth of the elect after natural birth (not a return to what Adam lost; i.e., he never had eternal life).
1) Those born of God are actual sons of God (Jn 1:12-13) and, therefore, possess God's divine eternal life (Jn 5:24, 1 Jn 3:14) as his sons.
2) God never takes away sonship, sons of God never lose sonship, they are the elect.
How do you define spiritual death?The answer is easy, death was not a part of it. Mankind sinned and at that point Adam and Eve died spiritually and started to die physically. We know their nature changed immediately but we also know it was physical when God told him he would return to dust.
I take Lk 3:38 to mean Adam was a son of God, not in the begotten sense like Jesus, but in the created sense of having no human father.I read them.
Problem: Adam is called the son of God.
Luke 3:38
the son of Enosh, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.
Jn 3:3 is the giving of eternal life in the new birth.So are you now saying Jn.3:3 is not the giving of eternal life? If so, what is being born?
The OT saints were saved by faith in the promise (Ge 15:5, seed, Jesus Christ, Gal 3:16), as was Abraham (Ge 15:6, Ro 4:3).We are sons of God because He has caused us to be spiritually alive. We have eternal life because we are in union with Christ. OT saints were never in union with Christ which is why they did not have eternal life
Jesus did not tell Nicodemus the new birth (spiritually alive) was something he could choose, but that it was a sovereign act of the Holy Spirit, as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:7-8).but they (believers) were spiritually alive having been born of God just as Jesus told Nicodemus was necessary to perceive
Jesus said the kingdom of God has come (Mt 12:48),and enter God's Kingdom.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?