Would you glorify God if Calvinism was true?

[Johan2222]

You didn’t answer the question. You’re telling me that according to the scriptures we’re not supposed to refute heretical theology but you can’t explain why Paul wrote an entire epistle to the Galatians refuting heretical theology.

Then you proceeded to imply that others in this thread have more knowledge than I do when I’ve been pointing out their errors by quoting scripture. If you’d like to actually discuss some of my explanations of the scriptures that would be more productive than simply saying that I’m wrong without demonstrating how my explanation is wrong. Just because there are more people that support Calvin’s theology in this thread than people who reject it doesn’t mean that their theology is correct. Surely if you were to go to a Jehovah’s Witness forum and were outnumbered that wouldn’t imply that their theology is correct either.

Previously you claimed that 2 Corinthians 6:14 says that we are supposed to abandon our loved ones if they aren’t a believer and when I pointed out that no one is born a believer so what do we do when our child is born an unbeliever, you didn’t reply to that question. After my bringing that evidence to the discussion do you still hold to the idea that we are not to associate with unbelievers?

My apologies friend, sorry for any offence but I can’t see any advantage in us continuing here.

May God grant you peace and prosper you and all your loved ones exceedingly.

See you on the other side.

Your foolish worthless friend,

J2222

 

[Clare73]

I think I’ve explained it enough that everyone who actually wants to understand it will.

That's a fail. . .your non-answer to the following question demonstrates your error regarding it. . .leaving my demonstration as the only answer in agreement with the NT:

how did they sin between Adam and Moses where there was no law to sin against, and "where there is no law there is no sin" (Ro 5:13),
yet all died because of sin. . .that is the dilemma of Ro 5:12-14.

So how did mankind become guilty of Adam's sin (i.e., the one and only transgression), which guilt is the cause of all mankind's death?

Answer: mankind was made guilty by the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17), just as mankind is made righteous by the imputation of righteousness (Ge 15:5, Ro 4:1-7),
which imputation of Christ's righteousness is patterned on (Ro 5:14) the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17, 18-19).

Q.E.D.

 

[BNR32FAN]

That's a fail. . .your non-answer to the following question demonstrates your error regarding it. . .leaving my demonstration as the only answer in agreement with the NT:

how did they sin between Adam and Moses where there was no law to sin against, and "where there is no law there is no sin" (Ro 5:13),
yet all died because of sin. . .that is the dilemma of Ro 5:12-14.

So how did mankind become guilty of Adam's sin (i.e., the one and only transgression), which guilt is the cause of all mankind's death?

Answer: mankind was made guilty by the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17), just as mankind is made righteous by the imputation of righteousness (Ge 15:5, Ro 4:1-7),
which imputation of Christ's righteousness is patterned on (Ro 5:14) the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17, 18-19).

Q.E.D.

No I’ve already explained it numerous times. ALL DIED BECAUSE ALL SINNED. Verse 12 refutes your interpretation that ALL DIED BECAUSE ADAM’S SIN WAS IMPUTED TO THEM. Nowhere does the passage say that Adam’s sin was imputed to anyone. You claimed that there was no law between Adam & Moses and I proved that wrong as well by quoting numerous passages proving that God had given commandments and that people had sinned by breaking them. Furthermore I’ve also demonstrated that your interpretation contradicts Ezekiel 18. The righteousness of the righteous will be on himself and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

 

[BNR32FAN]

That's a fail. . .your non-answer to the following question demonstrates your error regarding it. . .leaving my demonstration as the only answer in agreement with the NT:

how did they sin between Adam and Moses where there was no law to sin against, and "where there is no law there is no sin" (Ro 5:13),
yet all died because of sin. . .that is the dilemma of Ro 5:12-14.

So how did mankind become guilty of Adam's sin (i.e., the one and only transgression), which guilt is the cause of all mankind's death?

Answer: mankind was made guilty by the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17), just as mankind is made righteous by the imputation of righteousness (Ge 15:5, Ro 4:1-7),
which imputation of Christ's righteousness is patterned on (Ro 5:14) the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17, 18-19).

Q.E.D.

I have no idea where you’re getting this idea that there was no law that resulted in death because Paul doesn’t say that anywhere in the chapter. The wages is SIN is death. But here in Genesis 9

“Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man’s brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭9‬:‭5‬-‭6‬ ‭NASB 1995

Here’s a passage that specifically spells it out for you, something that should just be common sense that murder is a sin that has always been punishable by death. There’s never been any time since all creation that murder did not carry the penalty of death. Your claim that those who sinned between Adam & Moses ”surely you will not die” is just as absurd as when the serpent said it to Eve. Sodom & Gomorrah.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

So how did mankind become guilty of Adam's sin (i.e., the one and only transgression), which guilt is the cause of all mankind's death?

Answer: mankind was made guilty just as mankind is made righteous with the imputation of righteousness (Ge 15:5, Ro 4:1-7),
and where the imputation of sin (Ro 5:17, 12-16, 18-19) is the pattern (Ro 5:14) for that imputation of righteousness (Ro 5:18-19).

All children born of Adam descendants are born faithless. This is a transgression of the First Commandment. Guilty from the get-go.

 

[Clare73]

No I’ve already explained it numerous times. ALL DIED BECAUSE ALL SINNED. Verse 12 refutes your interpretation that ALL DIED BECAUSE ADAM’S SIN WAS IMPUTED TO THEM.

One more time. . .
Sin is the cause of death (Ro 6:23).
"Where there is no law (Decalogue), there is no sin (word of God in Ro 5:13)
There was no Decalogue between Adam and Moses and, therefore, no sin.
So what caused their deaths between Adam and Moses when there was no Decalogue and, therefore, no sin.

Nowhere does the passage say that Adam’s sin was imputed to anyone.

Then you don't understand
1) Ro 5:12-14, presenting the deaths of those between Adam and Moses (v.14) when there was no law to sin against (v.13) to cause their deaths.
2) Ro 5:17, presenting the imputation of Adam's sin,
3) Ro 5:18-19, the imputation of Adam's sin twice contrastingly paralleled with the imputation of Christ's righteousness.

I have no idea where you’re getting this idea that there was no law that resulted in death because Paul doesn’t say that anywhere in the chapter.

Paul also doesn't say anything about God creating the sun anywhere in the chapter.

You must Biblically demonstrate your assertion by presenting the law, between Adam and Moses, with its attached death penalty, against which they sinned to cause their deaths between Adam and Moses.
Without Biblical demonstration, your assertion is without Biblical merit.
You have presented no Biblical demonstration (law with attached death penalty in force between Adam and Moses) of your assertion.

The wages is SIN is death. But here in Genesis 9

Likewise in Ro 6:23.

“Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will require it. And from every man, from every man’s brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed, For in the image of God He made man.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭9‬:‭5‬-‭6‬ ‭NASB 1995

That's only one of the laws.
The other eight laws of the Decalogue in force before Moses?

Here’s a passage that specifically spells it out for you, something that should just be common sense that murder is a sin that has always been punishable by death. There’s never been any time since all creation that murder did not carry the penalty of death.

The subject is the Decalogue, not one law.
Forbidding murder does not cover the ten laws of the Decalogue by which mankind sins and, therefore, dies.

Your claim that those who sinned between Adam & Moses ”surely you will not die” is just as absurd as when the serpent said it to Eve. Sodom & Gomorrah.

Misrepresentation explains either failure to understand Ro 5:17-19. . .or something more nefarious.

You claimed that there was no law between Adam & Moses

Reveals unfamiliarity with Paul's use of "law" to mean the Decalogue, not just any law in the OT, in Ro 5:12-19.

and I proved that wrong as well by quoting numerous passages proving that God had given commandments and that people had sinned by breaking them. Furthermore I’ve also demonstrated that your interpretation contradicts Ezekiel 18. The righteousness of the righteous will be on himself and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself.

Correct. . .previously addressed (post #162). "Inability" to understand is above my pay grade.
Adam's sin is not inherited from Adam (as stated in Eze 19:20), it is imputed by God (as stated in Ro 5:17, 12-16, 18-19, which presents the deaths of those between Adam and Moses when there was no law to sin against to cause their deaths.)

Not much interested in covering the same territory (post #166) again.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The subject is the Decalogue, not one law.
Forbidding murder does not cover the ten laws of the Decalogue by which mankind sins and, therefore, dies. .

No that’s not the subject at all, you’re just moving the goal post because I proved you wrong. You said that there was no law between Adam & Moses that carried a death penalty with it. Now when I quote a law that specifically says that the death penalty is carried with that was given to Noah all the sudden I have to find 9 more? Lol that’s hilarious Was Adam given a Decalogue? No Adam was given one commandment not 10 and yet that one law brought death upon him. So why all the sudden are you moving the goal post to 10 laws? Anyway it doesn’t matter you still have the sins of Sodom & Gomorrah to contend with that carried the death penalty with them. I’ve only mentioned it twice already and you’ve declined to address it. This is exactly why I just wanted to stop discussing it with you but you had to persist by implying that you’d somehow won the argument when in reality you just refuse to admit what these passages about these laws that carried the death penalty specifically state.

 

[Clare73]

No that’s not the subject at all, you’re just moving the goal post because I proved you wrong. You said that there was no law between Adam & Moses that carried a death penalty with it. Now when I quote a law that specifically says that the death penalty is carried with that was given to Noah all the sudden I have to find 9 more? Lol that’s hilarious Was Adam given a Decalogue? No Adam was given one commandment not 10 and yet that one law brought death upon him. So why all the sudden are you moving the goal post to 10 laws? Anyway it doesn’t matter you still have the sins of Sodom & Gomorrah to contend with that carried the death penalty with them. I’ve only mentioned it twice already and you’ve declined to address it. This is exactly why I just wanted to stop discussing it with you but you had to persist by implying that you’d somehow won the argument when in reality you just refuse to admit what these passages about these laws that carried the death penalty specifically state.

Reveals unfamiliarity with Paul's use of "law," which helps explain misunderstanding of the passage.

Paul's use of "law" in Ro 5:12-14, the subject of this discussion, refers to the Decalogue.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Reveals unfamiliarity with Paul's use of "law," which helps explain misunderstanding of the passage.

Paul's use of "law" in Ro 5:12-14, the subject of this discussion, refers to the Decalogue.

Lol really? Because the exact same Greek word Nomos used in Romans 5:13 is the exact same Greek word Nomos used in Galatians 5:4 in reference to receiving circumcision. I don’t recall circumcision being part of the Decalogue. We can keep playing these games all day long where you just repeatedly embarrass yourself or you can just quit while you’re behind it’s really up to you.

 

[Clare73]

Lol really? Because the exact same Greek word Nomos used in Romans 5:13 is the exact same Greek word Nomos used in Galatians 5:4 in reference to receiving circumcision.

"Exact same" is redundant.

And any ole' port in a storm.

It's not about Greek nomenclature, it's about context of the nomenclature, which failure therein in basic exegesis is your recurring problem.
The vast majority of Paul's use of "law", in its context, refers to the Decalogue.
The context of Ro 5:13 is not the same as the context for Gal 5:4.

I don’t recall circumcision being part of the Decalogue.

< sigh >

Agreed. . .the context determines which meaning of "law," individual or Decalogue, is being used.
Ro 5:13 is about the Decalogue, while Gal 5:4 is about the circumcision law, which is not part of the Decalogue.
It's not rocket science.

We can keep playing these games all day long where you just repeatedly embarrass yourself or you can just quit while you’re behind it’s really up to you.

Ditto.

 

[BNR32FAN]

"Exact same" is redundant.

And any ole' port in a storm.

It's not about Greek nomenclature, it's about context of the nomenclature, which failure (re: context) in basic exegesis is your recurring problem.
The context of Ro 5:13 is not the same as the context for Gal 5:4.

Agreed.

Ditto.

And yet the same Greek word Nomos is used in reference to Adam’s law.

 

[Clare73]

And yet the same Greek word Nomos is used in reference to Adam’s law.

< sigh >

Are Ro 5:13 and Gal 5:4 in the same context? Do you even know?

What part of "context determines the usage of a word" do you not understand?

Most of the time, the context of "law" in the NT means the Decalogue. . .but not every time.
Gal 5:4 is one of those where the context shows "law" refers to circumcision, it does not refer to the Decalogue.
However, Ro 5:13 is not one of those referring to circumcision, for its context shows that there "law" refers to the Decalogue.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

Furthermore I’ve also demonstrated that your interpretation contradicts Ezekiel 18.

By far, and I mean by far, Ezekiel 18 is the most misquoted and abused text in Scripture. BY FAR.

I have written an entire OP on Ezekiel 18 outlining the abysmal interpretation of this text by some here at CF. Have you ever studied Ezekiel 18, especially vs. 20? Or did you just cut and paste vs. 20 out of its context and apply it to the Genesis 3?

The whole of Chapter 18 deals with actual sin and REPENTANCE and the Genesis 3 deals with the imputation of inherited sin and with no repentance. Genesis 3 and Ezekiel 18 are not parallel passages of Scripture. In fact, Ezekiel 18 prohibits sinful man imputing ANY JUDGEMENT upon his neighbor.

Any imputation of Judgement or Righteousness of all humanity is God's work...solely God's work. It is not man's work or capability. The New Testament clearly teaches us that the guilt of Adam was passed on to the entire human race, and the righteousness of Jesus Christ is passed on to all who believe upon Him. These two men – the first and second Adam are absolutely unique in all humanity as representative heads of humanity and this imputation occurs only once – by the power of God’s declaration.

How God judges us and now we judge our fellow man are to be kept in distinct categories. In Ezekiel 18, the righteousness of the son can not be transferred to the sinful and guilty father (vs. 18) and the sinfulness of the father can not be transferred to the son (v.20). Impossible.

However, sinful man mimics God's imputation of judgment. For example, a North Korean escapes and the person's whole family is murdered to set an example. This is not imputation....it is mass murder...actual sin and a transgression of the Fifth Commandment. Or a judge who finds a man guilty of owing $1 million and orders all relatives to pay for it. This is not imputation....it is theft....actual sin and a transgression of the Seventh Commandment. Ezekiel 18 deals with civil judgments not eternal judgments as the context clearly indicates.

Another difference between Genesis 3 and Ezekiel 18 is death. In Ezekiel 18 it is physical death whereas in Genesis 3 (as interpreted by the NT) is physical, spiritual and eternal death. Spiritual death and eternal death are relatively vague concepts in the OT.

Romans 5 is about the imputation of sin; Ezekiel deals with actual sin and on how the civil law should be applied correctly.

Link to my OP. Is Ezekiel 18:20 a proof text refuting original sin and imputed guilt?

 

[BNR32FAN]

By far, and I mean by far, Ezekiel 18 is the most misquoted and abused text in Scripture. BY FAR.

I have written an entire OP on Ezekiel 18 outlining the abysmal interpretation of this text by some here at CF. Have you ever studied Ezekiel 18, especially vs. 20? Or did you just cut and paste vs. 20 out of its context and apply it to the Genesis 3?

The whole of Chapter 18 deals with actual sin and REPENTANCE and the Genesis 3 deals with the imputation of inherited sin and with no repentance. Genesis 3 and Ezekiel 18 are not parallel passages of Scripture. In fact, Ezekiel 18 prohibits sinful man imputing ANY JUDGEMENT upon his neighbor.

Any imputation of Judgement or Righteousness of all humanity is God's work...solely God's work. It is not man's work or capability. The New Testament clearly teaches us that the guilt of Adam was passed on to the entire human race, and the righteousness of Jesus Christ is passed on to all who believe upon Him. These two men – the first and second Adam are absolutely unique in all humanity as representative heads of humanity and this imputation occurs only once – by the power of God’s declaration.

How God judges us and now we judge our fellow man are to be kept in distinct categories. In Ezekiel 18, the righteousness of the son can not be transferred to the sinful and guilty father (vs. 18) and the sinfulness of the father can not be transferred to the son (v.20). Impossible.

However, sinful man mimics God's imputation of judgment. For example, a North Korean escapes and the person's whole family is murdered to set an example. This is not imputation....it is mass murder...actual sin and a transgression of the Fifth Commandment. Or a judge who finds a man guilty of owing $1 million and orders all relatives to pay for it. This is not imputation....it is theft....actual sin and a transgression of the Seventh Commandment. Ezekiel 18 deals with civil judgments not eternal judgments as the context clearly indicates.

Another difference between Genesis 3 and Ezekiel 18 is death. In Ezekiel 18 it is physical death whereas in Genesis 3 (as interpreted by the NT) is physical, spiritual and eternal death. Spiritual death and eternal death are relatively vague concepts in the OT.

Romans 5 is about the imputation of sin; Ezekiel deals with actual sin and on how the civil law should be applied correctly.

Link to my OP. Is Ezekiel 18:20 a proof text refuting original sin and imputed guilt?

I don’t see anything except unsupported claims in both this post and your OP. A good place to start would probably be Romans 5:12 and explain why Paul said that death came to all men because all sinned. The reason death came to all men is because we inherited Adam’s sinful nature. That’s why verse 19 says the many were made sinners. And I never said that Genesis 3 and Ezekiel 18 are parallel passages.

 

[Ain't Zwinglian]

I don’t see anything except unsupported claims in both this post and your OP. A good place to start would probably be Romans 5:12 and explain why Paul said that death came to all men because all sinned. The reason death came to all men is because we inherited Adam’s sinful nature. That’s why verse 19 says the many were made sinners. And I never said that Genesis 3 and Ezekiel 18 are parallel passages.

The only reason I corresponded to you is in your post #163 you quoted Ezekiel 18 which has NOTHING to do with imputation. If my claims here are "unsupported" then please show me the error of my ways....Simply by stating my interpretation is "unsupported" is just word salad without stating why it is unsupported. Please show me contextually, why my claims are unsupported. I am open to disproof.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The only reason I corresponded to you is in your post #163 you quoted Ezekiel 18 which has NOTHING to do with imputation. If my claims here are "unsupported" then please show me the error of my ways....Simply by stating my interpretation is "unsupported" is just word salad without stating why it is unsupported. Please show me contextually, why my claims are unsupported. I am open to disproof.

Death came to all because all sinned. You don’t see that statement as evidence that death didn’t come to all because they were held accountable for Adam’s sin?

 

[Clare73]

Death came to all because all sinned. You don’t see that statement as evidence that death didn’t come to all because they were held accountable for Adam’s sin?

Death is the wages of sin (Ro 6:23).
Where there is no law (Decalogue), there is no sin (Ro 5:13).
There was no law (Decalogue) between Adam and Moses, therefore, there was no sin.
But all died because "all sinned" (Ro 5:14). . .how did "all sin" when there was no law (Decalogue) to sin against (Ro 5:13)?

You don't see that death came to all because the sin of Adam was imputed to them,
presented in Ro 5:12-16,
clearly stated in Ro 5:17, and
applied in Ro 5:18-19)?

That's unfortunate.

 

[SabbathBlessings]

There was sin from the beginning - Adam and Eve sinned, Jesus said sin lies at his door when Cain killed his brother Abel. Gen 4:7 Its shows the men in Sodom were sinful against God Gen 18:20 so there had to be God's law from the beginning, no law, no sin Rom 4:15. All has sinned Rom 3:23 which means all have been given God's law because where there is no law, there is no sin.

Sin started in heaven 1 John 3:8 so God's law is in heaven, His unedited version Rev 11:19 Psa 89:34 and was at Eden, which we also see in Exo 20:8-11 right in the Ten Commandments- Remember and points back to creation Exo 20:11 so shows it started at Creation, because where there is no law there is no sin Rom 4:15 and since there was sin, there was God's law as shown before Moses Gen 26:5. Sin, breaking God's law 1 John 3:4,is what separated man from God Isa 59:2. Man was separated from God in the garden and doing the same thing that separated man, is not how we are reconciled back to God Rev 22:14 We need a transformation in Christ John 14:15-18 Rom 6:1-4

 

[BNR32FAN]

Death is the wages of sin (Ro 6:23).
Where there is no law (Decalogue), there is no sin (Ro 5:13).
There was no law (Decalogue) between Adam and Moses, therefore, there was no sin.
But all died because "all sinned" (Ro 5:14). . .how did "all sin" when there was no law (Decalogue) to sin against (Ro 5:13)?

You don't see that death came to all because the sin of Adam was imputed to them,
presented in Ro 5:12-16,
clearly stated in Ro 5:17, and
applied in Ro 5:18-19)?

That's unfortunate.

I’ve already proved you wrong on this numerous times. Please do tell why were Sodom & Gomorrah destroyed if there was no sin that resulted in death between Adam & Moses?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Death is the wages of sin (Ro 6:23).
Where there is no law (Decalogue), there is no sin (Ro 5:13).
There was no law (Decalogue) between Adam and Moses, therefore, there was no sin.
But all died because "all sinned" (Ro 5:14). . .how did "all sin" when there was no law (Decalogue) to sin against (Ro 5:13)?

You don't see that death came to all because the sin of Adam was imputed to them,
presented in Ro 5:12-16,
clearly stated in Ro 5:17, and
applied in Ro 5:18-19)?

That's unfortunate.

The Greek word Nomos doesn’t mean Decalogue it means law. As I’ve already proved to you because Paul uses the same word in reference to circumcision.