Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

SOF Sin Nature

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$905.00
Goal
$1,038.00
Rev,

You won't debate the meaning of 'sin' with me but you go on to give your own meaning in modern English.

I read NT Greek and have taught NT Greek.

Why don't we discuss hamartia (sin) in the context of Romans 5:12 (SBLGNT):

Διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ δι’ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν ἐφ’ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον—​



Amen! That's my kind of faith. But before Jesus set me free and I was born again. I was 'dead in sin'. How do I know? The Bible tells me so! :sohappy

Eph 2:1-3 (NLT) explains my wicked, dead in sin state before I was liberated by Jesus:

Once you were dead because of your disobedience and your many sins. 2 You used to live in sin, just like the rest of the world, obeying the devil—the commander of the powers in the unseen world.[a] He is the spirit at work in the hearts of those who refuse to obey God. 3 All of us used to live that way, following the passionate desires and inclinations of our sinful nature. By our very nature we were subject to God’s anger, just like everyone else.​
Oz
I agree with you. Before we are saved by Faith in God's Grace we were LOST. We in fact still DIE that is what God said, disobey Me and you will DIE. Life is in Grace by Faith in Jesus Christ. BUT,NOW we are in Jesus NOT SINNERS, yes we still fail, yes we still need to live in Jesus obedient to His commandments, yes all too often we must ask for forgiveness, But in Jesus, Living with Him as LORD, NOW we are not lost. Ro 8: 1-2


I think if we could see Jesus as LORD and live for Him, and see the result of God's mercy we may have a religion that so many would not leave as unfulfilling and empty, I want the Christian family to show the majesty of the Grace we have that makes being a Christian something very special.
Live by and look to the Majesty Of our GOD, know Him, do not focus on how evil everyone is. I was twice broken, once I disobeyed God, then I saw the Majesty of Grace and my heart was broken now I try all I know to live for JESUS. Still broken still trying BUT NOW I am a child of the KING.
 
What are your thoughts on this? @JLB, I would be interested in your thoughts as well.

He alone is the Judge.


Then Peter opened his mouth and said: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him. Acts 10:34-35


  • But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.


This is a very controversial issue, one that can be both confusing and divisive, the very thing we are wanting to avoid.



And they said, “Cornelius the centurion, a just man, one who fears God and has a good reputation among all the nation of the Jews, was divinely instructed by a holy angel to summon you to his house, and to hear words from you.”
Acts 10:22


Here is a just man, one who fears God (like Job) but nevertheless, a man that The Lord sent Peter to for the Gospel.


Much speculation could be wrought over this.


Is that what we want, in a STATEMENT OF FAITH.


I think it would make it a statement of confusion.



JLB
 
He alone is the Judge.


Then Peter opened his mouth and said: “In truth I perceive that God shows no partiality. But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him. Acts 10:34-35


  • But in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him.


This is a very controversial issue, one that can be both confusing and divisive, the very thing we are wanting to avoid.



And they said, “Cornelius the centurion, a just man, one who fears God and has a good reputation among all the nation of the Jews, was divinely instructed by a holy angel to summon you to his house, and to hear words from you.”
Acts 10:22


Here is a just man, one who fears God (like Job) but nevertheless, a man that The Lord sent Peter to for the Gospel.


Much speculation could be wrought over this.


Is that what we want, in a STATEMENT OF FAITH.


I think it would make it a statement of confusion.



JLB
I tend to agree with you on that. Anything we write can be taken out of context and trying to qualify that in our SOF would add additional confusion.
Sometimes I just need to bounce things off others.
Thanks :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: JLB
OzSpen , JLB, JohnDB , WIP, Truthfrees
Please overview this.
**************************************************************************
Doctrinal Statement
We believe that the Bible is inspired by God in its entirety, and is without error in the original autographs, a complete and final written revelation from God.

We believe that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Messiah, born of a virgin, totally without sin, God in human flesh, the One Who died on the cross for our sins, was buried, rose again from the dead on the third day, and ascended to the right hand of the Father in heaven, where He now intercedes for us who believe in Him.

The Trinity means that there is one God who eternally exists as three distinct Persons — the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Stated differently, God is one in essence and three in person. These definitions express three crucial truths: (1) the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are distinct Persons, (2) each Person is fully God, (3) there is only one God.(Matt Perman 2006).


We support the biblical teaching that all people are born with inherited sin and are lost eternally. They can be saved through repentance, forgiveness and faith in Jesus Christ's death (atonement) and resurrection. No human merit or performance earns salvation. For children and the mentally challenged, they are covered by Jesus’ teaching, 'The kingdom of heaven belongs to people like them" (Matt 19:14 NIRV). Furthermore, We believe children and those with mental incapabilities who have no knowledge of good and evil, being innocent in the eyes of God, will be with Him if they should die in this state. (Deuteronomy 1:39) Those who have not heard the gospel, 'have no excuse’ before God because they have not pursued the evidence for God in creation (Rom 1:18—24a NIRV).

The visible Body of Christ (The Church) is universal in nature and not specific to one denomination. It consists of all believers who have confessed Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior and have been immersed in the baptismal waters. (Matthew 28:19)

We believe in a personal devil, Satan, who, along with all his angels, called demons or evil spirits, are destined to spend eternity in hell. They seek to deceive people, defeat believers, and destroy the work of God. They can be resisted by believers, who are protected by God and the intercession of Jesus Christ our Lord.

We believe that heaven is a real place where the saved will dwell forever, and that hell is a literal place of conscious torment where unbelievers will dwell.

We believe that genuine believers are born again by the Holy Spirit of God, and are indwelt, baptized into the Body of Christ, the true Church, and sealed by the Holy Spirit.

We believe that all believers need to be filled and empowered by the Holy Spirit to live a godly life and to be bold in our witness for the Lord.

We believe in the spiritual unity of all genuine believers in the Lord Jesus Christ.
 
I tend to agree with you on that. Anything we write can be taken out of context and trying to qualify that in our SOF would add additional confusion.
Sometimes I just need to bounce things off others.
Thanks :)


We are here for you, to support you and the vision God has given you for this community.

Anything you can use from these discussions for the SOF is for His glory.



CF.net is blessed.




JLB
 
Last edited:
We are here for you, to support you and the vision God has given you for this community.

Anything you can use from these discussions for the SOF is for His glory.



CF.net is blessed.




JLB
Thank you JLB,
I can't do this alone. We all need to stay in prayer and strengthen one another in the Lord.
There are many gifted individuals on this site, each with their individual talents and abilities. I have seen healthy friendships develop these past months and that's affirmation to me that we're moving down the right path.
Thanks for walking with me and others.
 
I will propose a slight wording change here....to try to eliminate confusion...

We support the biblical teaching that all people are born with an inclination to sin and are lost eternally. They can be saved through repentance, forgiveness and faith in Jesus Christ's death (atonement) and resurrection. No human merit or performance earns salvation. For children and the mentally challenged, they are covered by Jesus’ teaching, 'The kingdom of heaven belongs to people like them" (Matt 19:14 NIRV). Furthermore, We believe children and those with mental incapabilities who have no knowledge of good and evil, being innocent in the eyes of God, will be with Him if they should die in this state. (Deuteronomy 1:39) Those who have not heard the gospel, 'have no excuse’ before God because they have not pursued the evidence for God in creation (Rom 1:18—24a NIRV).

People don't necessarily understand what a "sin nature" is. Nor going deep into heavy theological topics (which takes a lot of time to get into) will we be able to go into with a steady stream of people.
The buzz words and phrases of old (which used to be commonly used and understood) are confusing today to many people. (Language skills have really dropped in the last 50-70 years)


and then we got guys like OZ,. And where he means well...your average person is going to roll his eyes up in his head and glaze over trying to read his dissertations.

but I also know that times are changing...and what does God do with the "snowflake" babies? Babies still in the test tubes awaiting invitro implantation?

Then...
We got this Baptism thing.
Now I've been to the Jordan River in the exact spot Jesus and John the Baptist did their thing. "Immersion" isn't a good word for this.
I'll explain.
Baptism is a word used to denote dyeing cloth, yarn, silks, wool, and rope.
The problem with any dye is the consistent formula producing inconsistent results. Forty sea urchins and three measures of berries and half a measure of vinegar and two big jars of hot water. (A recipe for purple)
Ok...there's a lot of room for variation. And no two batches of dye were exactly the same as another. Even blending the different batches (a great remedy) doesn't help over a period of time. (Fall is going to be different than spring)

But we all have the same baptism (batch of dye) that we have been changed by. (Think tie dye here).
Some have been sprinkled, some immersed but everyone has been affected by that One batch of Dye.

The Methodists don't immerse baptism candidates the same as Baptists do.

The story in Acts where the Gentile man was obviously saved and so they decided to Grant him a baptism ceremony is about how one of the functions of Baptism was an institution. (Why Jesus didn't perform the ritual on others and Paul was loathe to)

Nevertheless, I can see a whole bunch of contention arising from the word choice "immersion" in this.
I'm of the flavor of "if you got hit upside the head with a wet rag and believe in it you are baptized well enough" even though I was fully immersed during my baptism ritual.

(The Jordan River is not deep (shin deep...not even knee) unless at flood stage...and then it's too deep...10-14 ft)
So some "pouring over" and "splashing about" must have been part of it logistically speaking.

I can't be the only one who understands this...but I do understand that some people are adamant about full immersion for the ceremony (such as the Baptists are). I know of many stories about adults and children who had to wait for the ceremony because of ear tubes. (I know right)

So I was thinking that somehow we can "fix" the wording there to be more inclusive.

And just to be clear...
A Christening (baby is formally named in the church) is not the same as a baptism as a child or adult might consent to.

Then...
While in Slovakia, behind the torn down Iron Curtain, they required formal classes that only teenagers could take before getting baptized. One boy I knew was at odds with the schedule for the times the class was offered due to something else family related and everyone knew about it. But the boy believed.
Kinda a heart wrenching story. A real "Caleb" or "Stephen" story played out in real life. I simply refuse to be a part of the masses who reject someone for inane reasons... can't do it.

We shouldn't be divisive with our SOF for the site either.
 
My views may differ on a couple points.

The question of children's and/or mentally challenged individuals' salvation. I believe this is something best left up to God and it doesn't matter what we believe, feel, or otherwise. I believe the only reason we make any statement in this regard is to give ourselves a warm fuzzy but to me, knowing it is in God's hands is enough.

The question of baptism. I had questioned the use of the word "immersed" earlier. I am not convinced that baptism requires full immersion nor am I convinced it requires a certain level of understanding for one to be qualified for baptism. I personally was baptized as an infant in a Roman Catholic church and I believe the water was poured over my head. I believe my baptism was sufficient and we don't need to add rules to the process for I believe it is God that dictates.

I'm not sure I understand the use of the word "personal" as it is applied to the devil or Satan. I know this is how it was worded in the SoF previously too. For some reason it rubs me a little unusual.
 
My views may differ on a couple points.

The question of children's and/or mentally challenged individuals' salvation. I believe this is something best left up to God and it doesn't matter what we believe, feel, or otherwise. I believe the only reason we make any statement in this regard is to give ourselves a warm fuzzy but to me, knowing it is in God's hands is enough.

The question of baptism. I had questioned the use of the word "immersed" earlier. I am not convinced that baptism requires full immersion nor am I convinced it requires a certain level of understanding for one to be qualified for baptism. I personally was baptized as an infant in a Roman Catholic church and I believe the water was poured over my head. I believe my baptism was sufficient and we don't need to add rules to the process for I believe it is God that dictates.

I'm not sure I understand the use of the word "personal" as it is applied to the devil or Satan. I know this is how it was worded in the SoF previously too. For some reason it rubs me a little unusual.

Regarding the use of "personal" with regards to Satan...
The old addage of "The Devil made me do it" is a form of blame shifting that is almost as old as the first sin.
And it is a nod towards the notion that we all are truly struggling with our own "bad habits" of some kind that we may not identify with but still struggle to keep at Bay. All of these "go to" behaviors are opposed to God and our relationship with Him. For whatever reason we can't seem to be able get the best of them. As such they are our own personal Satan. (Metaphically speaking)
There are those, over the millennium, who have believed this to be the only Satan in existence but still have a firm conviction about God's existence while denying a semiautonomous Angelic Creature that thwarts Godly intentions of mankind actually exists.
Others do hold to the existence of a rebellious Angelic Creature...but that mankind's sinful nature causes enough problems of it's own. Where we aren't going to agree with that preacher with the last name of Bell...we don't want to exclude those who have a bit different view (functionally harmless) of Satan.
 
My views may differ on a couple points.

The question of children's and/or mentally challenged individuals' salvation. I believe this is something best left up to God and it doesn't matter what we believe, feel, or otherwise. I believe the only reason we make any statement in this regard is to give ourselves a warm fuzzy but to me, knowing it is in God's hands is enough.

The question of baptism. I had questioned the use of the word "immersed" earlier. I am not convinced that baptism requires full immersion nor am I convinced it requires a certain level of understanding for one to be qualified for baptism. I personally was baptized as an infant in a Roman Catholic church and I believe the water was poured over my head. I believe my baptism was sufficient and we don't need to add rules to the process for I believe it is God that dictates.

I'm not sure I understand the use of the word "personal" as it is applied to the devil or Satan. I know this is how it was worded in the SoF previously too. For some reason it rubs me a little unusual.
John and WIP
The didache speaks to the methodologies of being baptized where full immersion is the preferred method but scales down to sprinkling as needed.

I'm not stuck on the wording, so please, don't be shy. Offer a new set of words. Don't leave me hanging.

As far as Spencer goes, I'd rather have folk get glossy eyed. It gives them something to strive for other than being a snowflake. We need good teachers who know how to and are willing to teach in a variety of ways. We also need more students, which we all can be.
 
The question of baptism. I had questioned the use of the word "immersed" earlier. I am not convinced that baptism requires full immersion nor am I convinced it requires a certain level of understanding for one to be qualified for baptism. I personally was baptized as an infant in a Roman Catholic church and I believe the water was poured over my head. I believe my baptism was sufficient and we don't need to add rules to the process for I believe it is God that dictates.
This is SOP in the Catholic Church that your Christening becomes a Baptism after your Confirmation.
I really have no conflict with the notion...but again I do recognize that some people do.

The functions of Baptism have no real tie to the ceremonial washing (as Peter states) but the clean conscience to God has everything to do with the real Baptism. (Where God has marked you as His own) And a person's attitude and actions resulting from that attitude. (As well as the attitudes and actions of others resulting from such)

Which you fully have surrounding you. Why get you wet again? It ain't gonna do a thing except get you wet.
 
Last edited:
JohnDB ,
For some like myself, I think of it as a package deal because that's what I experienced first, then realized the scriptures were speaking to my experience which gave me affirmation

I understand the works mentality of water baptism and I have seen and experienced that first hand. I don't see how infant baptism is much different than my second baptism other than people who cared about my soul we're somehow comforted that my soul was safe from eternal damnation by this rite. Is it wrong to care about another's soul? I can't fault anyone for caring about another person, especially ones infant child. But I also don't see how either baptism saves you or your child so what's it point and purpose? Or, is comforting another's fears enough?
 
JohnDB ,
For some like myself, I think of it as a package deal because that's what I experienced first, then realized the scriptures were speaking to my experience which gave me affirmation

I understand the works mentality of water baptism and I have seen and experienced that first hand. I don't see how infant baptism is much different than my second baptism other than people who cared about my soul we're somehow comforted that my soul was safe from eternal damnation by this rite. Is it wrong to care about another's soul? I can't fault anyone for caring about another person, especially ones infant child. But I also don't see how either baptism saves you or your child so what's it point and purpose? Or, is comforting another's fears enough?


Ok...let's do a quick review of the functions of Baptism past and then we can talk about what people think about it today.

Baptism started way back when Abraham had three guests for Lunch and he provided water for God to "wash up and refresh" before the big meal. It's unrecognizable to most but... whatever.
Then fast forward in time to Moses washing Aaron before dressing him in his Robes and Accompaniments (turban and etc) of his office of priest. All priests had to wash in a Mikveh before putting on their robes of office. When they weren't on duty they washed on a normal schedule. (It wasn't daily)
Water for a Mikveh had to be flowing (living) water. It could be a spring but it had to flow... maybe not the fastest but flow it must.

Fast forward in time to John The Baptist.
There were many divisions in theology at this time. Pharisees and Sadducees are the most known. These groups had sub-sects. Also there were different ones like Zealots and Essenes (which John was raised by)

John's parents (being Levites...and apparently fairly devout Levites) placed John with the Essenes to be finished raising him. The Essenes we're very strict and restrictive in their religion. They had a bit of a quirk borrowed from a prophet of Old (as did a few others)
Apparently Daniel had a bathing thing with his disciples in Babylon. They still bathe a lot to this day.
The Essenes would bathe someone as they entered the sect as did the other groups. (And there were qualifications to meet to get baptized) and the Essenes would have bathing rituals required at least once a week if not more. But they were profitable from creating books (including the Torah) which were the creators of the "Dead Sea Scrolls"

Now John had to leave the Essenes with his followers/disciples. John wore camel hair and the Essenes wore bleach white. John was also creating the principle "Priesthood of every Believer" which was also aborhent to the Essenes who believed that only Levites and Family/Community leaders (Rabbi) could handle/quote scriptures without any requirements AND that people could bring their own sins to God without a sacrifice and assistance from a priest for forgiveness. (Jesus agreed with this but didn't personally institute this common belief today)

Then after Jesus' tour people didn't have many locations to be baptized. Rome had placed idols at so many water sources it seemed kinda incongruous to be baptized with water coming out from a Pagan God's fountain. But the city center usually had a well/fountain spring that would suffice...and heaven help you with each small community when you joined that Heretic Sect known as The Way or Nazarenes. Everyone in town would know. Your family often would apostsize you. (Kick you out of your family) and you were instantly unemployed and homeless. And the "Christians" required for you to be baptized because that's what Jesus/God said to do.

So....
Today the biggest thing people have to say about Baptism is "Jesus said to" and "Public Statement of faith".
But both are kinda moot points. If we really wanted to make a public declaration we would have televised the thing. And even then because of the way our nation is...there wouldn't be any consequences for our declaration.

Jesus said to... well Jesus also taught his disciples to not wash their hands before eating...but mamma would beat me if I didn't...guess who won? So obviously there's an incongruity here for most people. But they are adamant about it.

Priesthood, public confession, giving up everything, and joining the other followers are/were some of the functions of Baptism. Today I think that it is more about the metrics that a church's leadership is measured by than anything else.

None of the conditions of what it used to mean are present today. (Where we have reach at least)
 
Ok...let's do a quick review of the functions of Baptism past and then we can talk about what people think about it today.

Baptism started way back when Abraham had three guests for Lunch and he provided water for God to "wash up and refresh" before the big meal. It's unrecognizable to most but... whatever.
Then fast forward in time to Moses washing Aaron before dressing him in his Robes and Accompaniments (turban and etc) of his office of priest. All priests had to wash in a Mikveh before putting on their robes of office. When they weren't on duty they washed on a normal schedule. (It wasn't daily)
Water for a Mikveh had to be flowing (living) water. It could be a spring but it had to flow... maybe not the fastest but flow it must.

Fast forward in time to John The Baptist.
There were many divisions in theology at this time. Pharisees and Sadducees are the most known. These groups had sub-sects. Also there were different ones like Zealots and Essenes (which John was raised by)

John's parents (being Levites...and apparently fairly devout Levites) placed John with the Essenes to be finished raising him. The Essenes we're very strict and restrictive in their religion. They had a bit of a quirk borrowed from a prophet of Old (as did a few others)
Apparently Daniel had a bathing thing with his disciples in Babylon. They still bathe a lot to this day.
The Essenes would bathe someone as they entered the sect as did the other groups. (And there were qualifications to meet to get baptized) and the Essenes would have bathing rituals required at least once a week if not more. But they were profitable from creating books (including the Torah) which were the creators of the "Dead Sea Scrolls"

Now John had to leave the Essenes with his followers/disciples. John wore camel hair and the Essenes wore bleach white. John was also creating the principle "Priesthood of every Believer" which was also aborhent to the Essenes who believed that only Levites and Family/Community leaders (Rabbi) could handle/quote scriptures without any requirements AND that people could bring their own sins to God without a sacrifice and assistance from a priest for forgiveness. (Jesus agreed with this but didn't personally institute this common belief today)

Then after Jesus' tour people didn't have many locations to be baptized. Rome had placed idols at so many water sources it seemed kinda incongruous to be baptized with water coming out from a Pagan God's fountain. But the city center usually had a well/fountain spring that would suffice...and heaven help you with each small community when you joined that Heretic Sect known as The Way or Nazarenes. Everyone in town would know. Your family often would apostsize you. (Kick you out of your family) and you were instantly unemployed and homeless. And the "Christians" required for you to be baptized because that's what Jesus/God said to do.

So....
Today the biggest thing people have to say about Baptism is "Jesus said to" and "Public Statement of faith".
But both are kinda moot points. If we really wanted to make a public declaration we would have televised the thing. And even then because of the way our nation is...there wouldn't be any consequences for our declaration.

Jesus said to... well Jesus also taught his disciples to not wash their hands before eating...but mamma would beat me if I didn't...guess who won? So obviously there's an incongruity here for most people. But they are adamant about it.

Priesthood, public confession, giving up everything, and joining the other followers are/were some of the functions of Baptism. Today I think that it is more about the metrics that a church's leadership is measured by than anything else.

None of the conditions of what it used to mean are present today. (Where we have reach at least)


And all this time, I though water baptism began with John.


The baptism of John—where was it from? From heaven or from men?”
And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’ Matthew 21:25




JLB
 
And all this time, I though water baptism began with John.


The baptism of John—where was it from? From heaven or from men?”
And they reasoned among themselves, saying, “If we say, ‘From heaven,’ He will say to us, ‘Why then did you not believe him?’ Matthew 21:25




JLB
Only the name of it changed with John...that's where the Greek name change began. And if you read my other post about the dyeing of materials it will really make sense.
 
I will propose a slight wording change here....to try to eliminate confusion...

We support the biblical teaching that all people are born with an inclination to sin and are lost eternally.

JohnDB,

I don't consider that 'inclination to sin' is supported by this biblical data:

The total depravity of man is seen throughout the Bible. Man’s heart is “deceitful and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9). The Bible also teaches us that man is born dead in transgression and sin (Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, Ephesians 2:1-5). The Bible teaches that because unregenerate man is “dead in transgressions” (Ephesians 2:5), he is held captive by a love for sin (John 3:19; John 8:34) so that he will not seek God (Romans 3:10-11) because he loves the darkness (John 3:19) and does not understand the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14). Therefore, men suppress the truth of God in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18) and continue to willfully live in sin. Because they are totally depraved, this sinful lifestyle seems right to men (Proverbs 14:12) so they reject the gospel of Christ as foolishness (1 Corinthians 1:18) and their mind is “hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is unable to do so” (Romans 8:7).

The Apostle Paul summarizes the total depravity of man in Romans 3:9-18. He begins this passage by saying that “both Jews and Greeks are all under sin.” Simply put, this means that man is under the control of sin or is controlled by his sin nature (his natural tendency to sin),,,, (Total depravity - is it biblical? Got Questions)​
and then we got guys like OZ,. And where he means well...your average person is going to roll his eyes up in his head and glaze over trying to read his dissertations.

You are a staff member and administrator. Is this how a number of moderators, staff and administrators think about my contributions on CFnet?

I found your comments not only very demeaning but also not spoken directly to me but to a third party. If you have an issue with the content of ANY of my posts, please speak directly to me and not engage in this kind of disparaging comment.

This gets to the more basic problem with your statement: 'your average person is going to roll his eyes up in his head and glaze over trying to read his dissertations'. This is inflammatory language and not desirable for anyone in leadership on a forum.

If this is how you and other staff consider my posts, I'm gone to where my posts will be appreciated more by administrators or to where I'll enjoy cricket.

1546295519880.png

We shouldn't be divisive with our SOF for the site either.

John, any Statement of Faith is meant to sort the orthodox from the unorthodox (according to that organisation).

Oz
 
JohnDB,

I don't consider that 'inclination to sin' is supported by this biblical data:

The total depravity of man is seen throughout the Bible. Man’s heart is “deceitful and desperately wicked” (Jeremiah 17:9). The Bible also teaches us that man is born dead in transgression and sin (Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, Ephesians 2:1-5). The Bible teaches that because unregenerate man is “dead in transgressions” (Ephesians 2:5), he is held captive by a love for sin (John 3:19; John 8:34) so that he will not seek God (Romans 3:10-11) because he loves the darkness (John 3:19) and does not understand the things of God (1 Corinthians 2:14). Therefore, men suppress the truth of God in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18) and continue to willfully live in sin. Because they are totally depraved, this sinful lifestyle seems right to men (Proverbs 14:12) so they reject the gospel of Christ as foolishness (1 Corinthians 1:18) and their mind is “hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is unable to do so” (Romans 8:7).​
The Apostle Paul summarizes the total depravity of man in Romans 3:9-18. He begins this passage by saying that “both Jews and Greeks are all under sin.” Simply put, this means that man is under the control of sin or is controlled by his sin nature (his natural tendency to sin),,,, (Total depravity - is it biblical? Got Questions)​


You are a staff member and administrator. Is this how a number of moderators, staff and administrators think about my contributions on CFnet?

I found your comments not only very demeaning but also not spoken directly to me but to a third party. If you have an issue with the content of ANY of my posts, please speak directly to me and not engage in this kind of disparaging comment.

This gets to the more basic problem with your statement: 'your average person is going to roll his eyes up in his head and glaze over trying to read his dissertations'. This is inflammatory language and not desirable for anyone in leadership on a forum.

If this is how you and other staff consider my posts, I'm gone to where my posts will be appreciated more by administrators or to where I'll enjoy cricket.

View attachment 7184



John, any Statement of Faith is meant to sort the orthodox from the unorthodox (according to that organisation).

Oz
Hey,
I don't mean to hurt your feelings...it's just that you are highly educated and use a lot of words not in common venacular and where you intend precision you don't strive for brevity...and then you include your sources regularly...
Your average person won't read what you wrote.

It's not that you are horrible...but your ability to relate on a much more street level is limited when you do go on so. And street level is where the vast majority of our reach with this forum is at.

I enjoy your posts even if I don't necessarily share in your positions on different subjects.
Such as man's inclination to sin.
I believe that man seeks to be "good" but cannot attain righteousness. (CS Lewis)
And man's sin nature keeps him from ever attaining righteousness. I may be not have sinned since attaining the age of accountability but God judges not just on actions but also on our hearts...and that inclination condemns us every time. So I'm guilty no matter what I have done or not done.
"Desperately Wicked" is guilding the Lilly so to speak...but the Bible is full of metaphor and simile.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JLB
Hey,
I don't mean to hurt your feelings...it's just that you are highly educated and use a lot of words not in common venacular and where you intend precision you don't strive for brevity...and then you include your sources regularly...
Your average person won't read what you wrote.

It's not that you are horrible...but your ability to relate on a much more street level is limited when you do go on so. And street level is where the vast majority of our reach with this forum is at.

I enjoy your posts even if I don't necessarily share in your positions on different subjects.
Such as man's inclination to sin.
I believe that man seeks to be "good" but cannot attain righteousness. (CS Lewis)
And man's sin nature keeps him from ever attaining righteousness. I may be not have sinned since attaining the age of accountability but God judges not just on actions but also on our hearts...and that inclination condemns us every time. So I'm guilty no matter what I have done or not done.
"Desperately Wicked" is guilding the Lilly so to speak...but the Bible is full of metaphor and simile.

John,

Please don't try to minimise what you did to me. This forum has been promoting the need to care for one another in how we treat one another. I agree with these principles.

Then you come along and insult me. You did not hurt my feelings. You did things to me there were contrary to the tone CFnet is currently promoting.

it's just that you are highly educated and use a lot of words not in common venacular

I hope you mean 'vernacular'.

You use a lot of words not in common venacular (sic) and where you intend precision you don't strive for brevity...and then you include your sources regularly...

Please tell me when I don't use 'common' words because this generalistation, 'lots of words not in common vernacular', tells me nothing about words I use that are difficult to understand. What you've said here cannot help me to know how I need to write simpler.

Do you believe all others and I should be thieves on this forum? What I mean is this: What's wrong with including sources? When we take a copy from another's writing, we steal from another person (plagiarise) if we don't give the credit.

This relates to honesty in writing.

And man's sin nature keeps him from ever attaining righteousness.

The Bible doesn't teach this. It does teach: 'Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 5:1 NIV).

What does it mean to be 'justified through faith' in Christ? It means to be 'set right' or 'declared righteous' by God. When you and I committed our lives to Christ, we were declared innocent of all charges against us because we had all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Rom 3:23 NIV).

As a result, we now have 'peace with God'. This is not a fuzzy wuzzy inner feeling of peace, which would be called the peace of God. Instead, we have peace with God. We are now reconciled with God, outwardly have peace with God and it's demonstrated in our lives.

Justification happened once - at salvation - when we were enemies of God and thanks to Jesus' death and resurrection we are found 'not guilty' as sinners saved by grace - through faith in Jesus.

That does not make us sinless but before God he has made us righteous. He is the Judge who declares the sinner 'not guilty'. It's parallel to a court of law where a person is declared 'not guilty' and is set free.



Oz
 
Last edited:
John and WIP
The didache speaks to the methodologies of being baptized where full immersion is the preferred method but scales down to sprinkling as needed.

I'm not stuck on the wording, so please, don't be shy. Offer a new set of words. Don't leave me hanging.

As far as Spencer goes, I'd rather have folk get glossy eyed. It gives them something to strive for other than being a snowflake. We need good teachers who know how to and are willing to teach in a variety of ways. We also need more students, which we all can be.
Here are changes I might suggest for your consideration.

We support the biblical teaching that all people are born with inherited sin and are lost eternally. They can be saved through repentance, forgiveness and faith in Jesus Christ's death (atonement) and resurrection. No human merit or performance earns salvation.
For the above, could just end it where I did and leave out all the explanation about what happens to infants, toddlers, and mentally challenged. In my view what we think happens in regard to these is only speculation and we can trust that God has things well under control.


The visible Body of Christ (The Church) is universal in nature and not specific to one denomination. It consists of all believers who have confessed Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior and have been baptized in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
In the above, I changed it to just identify baptism but not the specific method.
 
Here are changes I might suggest for your consideration.

For the above, could just end it where I did and leave out all the explanation about what happens to infants, toddlers, and mentally challenged. In my view what we think happens in regard to these is only speculation and we can trust that God has things well under control.


In the above, I changed it to just identify baptism but not the specific method.
Haven't been following along.
Just came upon this.

ARE people born with inherited sin?
Or are we born with the effects of the first sin?

Was Augustine right?
He changed his mind about so many things, I find it difficult to trust him, no matter how intelligent he was.

If we're born with inherited sin, then yes, babies better get baptized as soon as possible because sin will not enter heaven.
Revelation 21:27
But it says no one that PRACTICES abomination shall enter.
Do babies practice abomination? No.

I believe we're born separated from God....with the EFFECTS of original sin...this is why Jesus said the Kingdom is made of those such as these.....children. We're all innocent until we become un-innocent. At what age? It varies....probably about 12 to 14. Or earlier. I've taught kids that knew Jesus at the age of 8 or so. At this point it becomes an individual responsibility to become joined with God.

Just some thoughts....
 
Back
Top