[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Not quite sure what you are asking for, you don’t agree that we choose to sin individually?[/quote]
Well, obviously I don’t agree that we can choose to sin. I put earlier, based on Romans 5:12 that our hand was forced, and we inherited sin.
My question, hopefully put more direct here is this: Romans 3:23 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Why do you add the word choose in there?[/quote]
Hmm, we seem to be going in circles - I don’t see a forced hand in Romans 5:12. I see the simple declarative that we all sin - no force implied. What gives you the idea that sin is forced upon us? I have never seen any passage in Scripture that states we are forced to sin and our free will is negated by this force . . . have you?
My point is don’t be so sure based on the fact that this form of Christianity has been around for centuries and is the most popular form of Christianity. You really need to open your heart and mind to see that the main and most popular christian doctrines like the two I mentioned above were not taught in the original christian congregation when the apostles were alive and were planted as weeds once the apostles fell asleep in death.
[/quote]
Thanks mse2us, and I do want to have this conversation, but the starting point will have to be the 5 points I raised earlier. Let’s start there and move forward. We can both give each other our conclusions all day, so let’s start with the basics and build up - agreed?[/quote]
Agreed. I’ve been super busy today so I’ll respond to this tomorrow, I mean later today.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Not quite sure what you are asking for, you don’t agree that we choose to sin individually?[/quote]
Well, obviously I don’t agree that we can choose to sin. I put earlier, based on Romans 5:12 that our hand was forced, and we inherited sin.
My question, hopefully put more direct here is this: Romans 3:23 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Why do you add the word choose in there?[/quote]
Hmm, we seem to be going in circles - I don’t see a forced hand in Romans 5:12. I see the simple declarative that we all sin - no force implied. What gives you the idea that sin is forced upon us? I have never seen any passage in Scripture that states we are forced to sin and our free will is negated by this force . . . have you?[/quote]
Not to get all theoretical, but hear me out please. You are saying that we choose to sin, but that it is possible for us to not sin. However, the scriptures do show that all men sin and fall short of the glory of God. How does that leave room for the idea that we can choose not to sin?
Ps 51:5 NIV says it nicely.
“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me”
Maybe we are viewing sin in 2 different ways? I am talking about inherited sin; the sin that causes us to “miss the mark” of perfection, which therefore leads to death.
The JW’s will love this. In my view, the most exceedingly accurate human expositions of Biblical truth ever put in one place were the Westminster standards of 1646. I discovered them several years into my spiritual journey wherein NOT having my mind remote controlled by a group of faceless dictators from the foot of the Brooklyn Bridge, I was free to prayerfully explore the broad body of work left to us by 2000 years of godly, not so godly and ungodly study.
As usual the Westminster divines got it about as close to right as fallen man is likely to get. The bound printed copies are positively festooned with scripture references. Incidentally, that large group of God fearing men, who spent a few years hammering all this out featured quite a few specimens who were actual real live experts on the autographical languages and weren’t afraid to put their names on their work. Here is chapter 6 of the Westminster Confession of Faith.
[quote]Westminster Confession of Faith
CHAPTER VI.
Of the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of
the Punishment thereof.
I. Our first parents, begin seduced by the subtlety and temptations of Satan, sinned in eating the forbidden fruit. This their sin God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.
II. By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body.
III. They being the root of mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by original generation.
IV. From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.
V. This corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and all the motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.
VI. Every sin, both original and actual, being a transgression of the righteous law of God, and contrary thereunto, doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal.[/quote]
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Not quite sure what you are asking for, you don’t agree that we choose to sin individually?[/quote]
Well, obviously I don’t agree that we can choose to sin. I put earlier, based on Romans 5:12 that our hand was forced, and we inherited sin.
My question, hopefully put more direct here is this: Romans 3:23 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Why do you add the word choose in there?[/quote]
Hmm, we seem to be going in circles - I don’t see a forced hand in Romans 5:12. I see the simple declarative that we all sin - no force implied. What gives you the idea that sin is forced upon us? I have never seen any passage in Scripture that states we are forced to sin and our free will is negated by this force . . . have you?[/quote]
Not to get all theoretical, but hear me out please. You are saying that we choose to sin, but that it is possible for us to not sin. However, the scriptures do show that all men sin and fall short of the glory of God. How does that leave room for the idea that we can choose not to sin?
Ps 51:5 NIV says it nicely.
“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me”
Maybe we are viewing sin in 2 different ways? I am talking about inherited sin; the sin that causes us to “miss the mark” of perfection, which therefore leads to death. [/quote]
May I ask a quick question? Here is a hypothetical possiblitly that we all see everyday in the gym. We are working out on the bench and a fine speciman of the opposite sex sits down at the peck deck infront of us. We have a choice. We can either sit there and drool while admiring the creation that God has given us, or we can stand up walk over to the water fountain and wait for her to complete her workout. This is a choice whether to sin or not to sin. I personally would be weak and sit there and admire God’s creation. I have chosen to sin. Matt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Did Adam cause me to sin, or did I chose to sin?
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
<<< Did Adam cause me to sin, or did I chose to sin? >>>[/quote]
My reading of the Bible, in a nutshell, tells me both. See my post above yours.
Not to get all theoretical, but hear me out please. You are saying that we choose to sin, but that it is possible for us to not sin. However, the scriptures do show that all men sin and fall short of the glory of God. How does that leave room for the idea that we can choose not to sin?
Ps 51:5 NIV says it nicely.
“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me”
Maybe we are viewing sin in 2 different ways? I am talking about inherited sin; the sin that causes us to “miss the mark” of perfection, which therefore leads to death. [/quote]
No I say that we choose to sin AND it is possible that a man could live without sinning - BUT God has declared from his omniscient view in eternity that we will all choose to sin of our own free will. So again, we’re back to the same point - the Bible says that we (individually) sin - it does not say we are forced to sin. You keep implying this forced to sin, but I asked for a declarative from scripture that we as individuals are forced to sin.
You cannot inherit a sin - the Bible is very clear on that point:
Ezekiel 18:20 (NIV) “The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him.”
Deuteronomy 24:16 (NIV) “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sin.”
Jeremiah 31:30 (NIV) “Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes–his own teeth will be set on edge.”
Ezekiel 18: 4 (NIV) “Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die.”
Two points for you:
If I cannot inherit the sins of my parents, then I also could not inherit the sin of Adam.
If I am to die for my own sins, then I cannot die for the sin of Adam. Adam has to die for his sins, and I for mine - that is crystal clear in my Bible.
Your passage from Psalms is poetry - the actual Hebrew reads “Behold, in iniquity was I writhed out” - a poetic reference back to the fact that Eve’s sin caused women to suffer pain in childbirth - there is no indicator in the hebrew that the sin is David’s.
The second phrase in Hebrew literally reads “in sin my mother went into heat for me.” - again a poetic reference to the act of his own conception and that his mother was a sinner before he was even a glimmer in his parent’s eyes.
The poetic point he is trying to make it that (in context of the passage/guilt over the Bathsheba debacle), not only did he sin in the instance in question, but he is a sinful man and his whole existence has been surrounded by sin, so of course he deserves punishment from a righteous God for his sins.
The passage actually supports the fact that he knows he has chosen to sin and deserves punishment for it.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
<<< Did Adam cause me to sin, or did I chose to sin? >>>[/quote]
My reading of the Bible, in a nutshell, tells me both. See my post above yours.[/quote]
I agree that it is both, but my question was directed at Honest. He beleives we do not have a choice in the matter of whether to sin or not. We are born with sin, but once we reach an age where we know right and wrong it now becomes our choice. I really do not want to argue the age of accountability, because we can get all over the place. My question was basically we have a choice whether to continue to sin, or stop. Jesus says it best Matt 26:41 Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
<<< Did Adam cause me to sin, or did I chose to sin? >>>[/quote]
My reading of the Bible, in a nutshell, tells me both. See my post above yours.[/quote]
I agree that it is both, but my question was directed at Honest. He beleives we do not have a choice in the matter of whether to sin or not. We are born with sin, but once we reach an age where we know right and wrong it now becomes our choice. I really do not want to argue the age of accountability, because we can get all over the place. My question was basically we have a choice whether to continue to sin, or stop. Jesus says it best Matt 26:41 Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation. The spirit is willing, but the body is weak.[/quote]
The will is bound to carnality in the fall of Adam. While the possibility of avoiding actual transgression may exist for the sake of discussion, all descendants of Adam will freely(sorta) choose evil minus the sanctifying power of the indwelling Spirit which none have until regeneration.
[quote]Romans 7:14ff
14.For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15.For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16.But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. 17.So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 18.For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19.For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. 20.But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.
21.I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. 22.For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23.but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24.Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25.Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.[/quote]
We need to be careful here because right now the JW’s have their noses pasted to their monitors (go ahead you can jump back now guys =] ) just drooling for us all to start arguing with each other so they can jump in and exclaim:
“SEE!!! This is what I’m talkin about. This is why I surrender my brain to the WB&TS!!! You guys can’t even agree among yourselves. You don’t have the benefit of being told what to believe about everything so you run around considering each other brothers even when you have differences on non fatal doctrinal subtleties. What an abomination”
I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t phrase it like that, but that’s what it would add up to.
Ugh my post didn’t show up, oh well.
Now I don’t understand everything there is to this subject but from what I understand is that when Adam and Eve sinned caused spiritual death. John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Which is the reason we all experience the effects of sin and die and although not guilty of Adam and Eves sin, which is why we need to be born of Spirit. Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Even though we are not guilty of Adam and Eve’s sin we are predispose to sin due to the sin nature we inherited where we all sin at some point of our own accord and are guilty for it.
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Ugh my post didn’t show up, oh well.
Now I don’t understand everything there is to this subject but from what I understand is that when Adam and Eve sinned caused spiritual death. John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Which is the reason we all experience the effects of sin and die and although not guilty of Adam and Eves sin, which is why we need to be born of Spirit. Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Even though we are not guilty of Adam and Eve’s sin we are predispose to sin due to the sin nature we inherited where we all sin at some point of our own accord and are guilty for it.[/quote]
In short, I agree.
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
Ugh my post didn’t show up, oh well.
Now I don’t understand everything there is to this subject but from what I understand is that when Adam and Eve sinned caused spiritual death. John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Which is the reason we all experience the effects of sin and die and although not guilty of Adam and Eves sin, which is why we need to be born of Spirit. Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Even though we are not guilty of Adam and Eve’s sin we are predispose to sin due to the sin nature we inherited where we all sin at some point of our own accord and are guilty for it.[/quote]
In short, I agree.[/quote]
[quote]JoabSonOfZeruiah wrote:
It’s is interesting that you talk about the age of accountability, do you think it was applied to Israel when they entered Canaan with Joshua?[/quote]
I really do not want to approach this subject. We can really get out of wack talking about this. Maybe it is Biblical, or maybe it is not and just a doctrine. I have not thoughts one way or the other. It is just a buzz word that people like to use.
Joab, I agree with everything you said - right on the money except this one phrase:
“we are predispose to sin due to the sin nature we inherited” - this is a common teaching, but I think it needs to made clear that there is no predispoition to sin.
Lemme splain,
When Adam and Eve were in the garden prior to their sin, they were spiritually alive - that is they were in contact with God and had a direct relationship with him (He is the Giver of Life)
When they sinned - their immediate punishment was spiritual death (separation from God).
Our inheiritance from Adam is that we are born spiritually dead/cut off from God (that is our new nature or natural state) - other than that we are a blank slate - neither righteous nor sinful. This is our new fallen state - we should have been born spiritual alive (in a living relationship with God), but we cannot be because of Adam’s sin.
In this blank state we can seek God and he will find us, or we can choose to sin (as we all manage to do) and then we have entered into the condemnation of judgement for our own sins. Then we need to seek him for forgiveness of our sins and new life (two of the gifts of His grace and mercy) - this is all done via our free will - no force, no predisposition. I am sinner because I chose to be a sinner instead of choosing to be a righteous man.
Evidence of our new life in Christ is the indwelling presence of God the Holy Spirit (our new life in him) and we are now spiritually alive again as we should have been without sin. God the Holy Spirit will be our companion on this earth (and our source of spiritual life) until we are resurrected into eternal fellowship in the presence of God. That is why the Holy Spiirt is the promise of the resurrection.
let me know if you have questions or need the bible verses
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Not quite sure what you are asking for, you don’t agree that we choose to sin individually?[/quote]
Well, obviously I don’t agree that we can choose to sin. I put earlier, based on Romans 5:12 that our hand was forced, and we inherited sin.
My question, hopefully put more direct here is this: Romans 3:23 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Why do you add the word choose in there?[/quote]
Hmm, we seem to be going in circles - I don’t see a forced hand in Romans 5:12. I see the simple declarative that we all sin - no force implied. What gives you the idea that sin is forced upon us? I have never seen any passage in Scripture that states we are forced to sin and our free will is negated by this force . . . have you?[/quote]
Not to get all theoretical, but hear me out please. You are saying that we choose to sin, but that it is possible for us to not sin. However, the scriptures do show that all men sin and fall short of the glory of God. How does that leave room for the idea that we can choose not to sin?
Ps 51:5 NIV says it nicely.
“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me”
Maybe we are viewing sin in 2 different ways? I am talking about inherited sin; the sin that causes us to “miss the mark” of perfection, which therefore leads to death. [/quote]
May I ask a quick question? Here is a hypothetical possiblitly that we all see everyday in the gym. We are working out on the bench and a fine speciman of the opposite sex sits down at the peck deck infront of us. We have a choice. We can either sit there and drool while admiring the creation that God has given us, or we can stand up walk over to the water fountain and wait for her to complete her workout. This is a choice whether to sin or not to sin. I personally would be weak and sit there and admire God’s creation. I have chosen to sin. Matt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Did Adam cause me to sin, or did I chose to sin?
[/quote]
Yep, that is why I asked the clarifying question. I was thinking that was the type of sin being talked about. I am refering to the inherited sin. The sin that causes us to get old, to get sick and to die. If you are refering to the other sin, then yes we have a choice at those moments what we will choose to do.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Not quite sure what you are asking for, you don’t agree that we choose to sin individually?[/quote]
Well, obviously I don’t agree that we can choose to sin. I put earlier, based on Romans 5:12 that our hand was forced, and we inherited sin.
My question, hopefully put more direct here is this: Romans 3:23 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Why do you add the word choose in there?[/quote]
Hmm, we seem to be going in circles - I don’t see a forced hand in Romans 5:12. I see the simple declarative that we all sin - no force implied. What gives you the idea that sin is forced upon us? I have never seen any passage in Scripture that states we are forced to sin and our free will is negated by this force . . . have you?[/quote]
Not to get all theoretical, but hear me out please. You are saying that we choose to sin, but that it is possible for us to not sin. However, the scriptures do show that all men sin and fall short of the glory of God. How does that leave room for the idea that we can choose not to sin?
Ps 51:5 NIV says it nicely.
“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me”
Maybe we are viewing sin in 2 different ways? I am talking about inherited sin; the sin that causes us to “miss the mark” of perfection, which therefore leads to death. [/quote]
May I ask a quick question? Here is a hypothetical possiblitly that we all see everyday in the gym. We are working out on the bench and a fine speciman of the opposite sex sits down at the peck deck infront of us. We have a choice. We can either sit there and drool while admiring the creation that God has given us, or we can stand up walk over to the water fountain and wait for her to complete her workout. This is a choice whether to sin or not to sin. I personally would be weak and sit there and admire God’s creation. I have chosen to sin. Matt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Did Adam cause me to sin, or did I chose to sin?
[/quote]
Yep, that is why I asked the clarifying question. I was thinking that was the type of sin being talked about. I am refering to the inherited sin. The sin that causes us to get old, to get sick and to die. If you are refering to the other sin, then yes we have a choice at those moments what we will choose to do.[/quote]
To me we are born sinful, or the propensity to sin, but it is our choice to sin that condemns our souls. I know you do not believe in being eternally damned. Not being Catholic I really struggle with Original Sin, so I guess I need to do some more research on this subject. I will take guidance only from my Christian Brothers and Sisters if there are any of them on here.
I am still confused a little, so please bare with me. Are you saying that all of us are born perfect? And that we all choose to sin later? You mention spiritually dead, and that we inherited it. What does that mean to you.
Side question. Are you saying that if none of us commit a sin (hypothetically) then we won’t get sick, get old or die?
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
Not quite sure what you are asking for, you don’t agree that we choose to sin individually?[/quote]
Well, obviously I don’t agree that we can choose to sin. I put earlier, based on Romans 5:12 that our hand was forced, and we inherited sin.
My question, hopefully put more direct here is this: Romans 3:23 says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God”. Why do you add the word choose in there?[/quote]
Hmm, we seem to be going in circles - I don’t see a forced hand in Romans 5:12. I see the simple declarative that we all sin - no force implied. What gives you the idea that sin is forced upon us? I have never seen any passage in Scripture that states we are forced to sin and our free will is negated by this force . . . have you?[/quote]
Not to get all theoretical, but hear me out please. You are saying that we choose to sin, but that it is possible for us to not sin. However, the scriptures do show that all men sin and fall short of the glory of God. How does that leave room for the idea that we can choose not to sin?
Ps 51:5 NIV says it nicely.
“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me”
Maybe we are viewing sin in 2 different ways? I am talking about inherited sin; the sin that causes us to “miss the mark” of perfection, which therefore leads to death. [/quote]
May I ask a quick question? Here is a hypothetical possiblitly that we all see everyday in the gym. We are working out on the bench and a fine speciman of the opposite sex sits down at the peck deck infront of us. We have a choice. We can either sit there and drool while admiring the creation that God has given us, or we can stand up walk over to the water fountain and wait for her to complete her workout. This is a choice whether to sin or not to sin. I personally would be weak and sit there and admire God’s creation. I have chosen to sin. Matt 5:28 But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. Did Adam cause me to sin, or did I chose to sin?
[/quote]
Yep, that is why I asked the clarifying question. I was thinking that was the type of sin being talked about. I am refering to the inherited sin. The sin that causes us to get old, to get sick and to die. If you are refering to the other sin, then yes we have a choice at those moments what we will choose to do.[/quote]
To me we are born sinful, or the propensity to sin, but it is our choice to sin that condemns our souls. I know you do not believe in being eternally damned.
On another note, not being Catholic I really struggle with Original Sin, so I guess I need to do some more research on this subject. I will take guidance only from my Christian Brothers and Sisters if there are any of them on here.[/quote]
D, I was thinking about what you said about how you don’t feel we need to do works to gain our reward. You shared scriptures that show that our only salvation is from Christ, which I agree with. However, then we have scriptures like “faith without works is dead” and then we have this scripture:
James 2:14-25 NIV
14What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? 15Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. 16If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it? 17In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.
18But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”
Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by what I do.
19You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe thatâ??and shudder.
20You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless[d]? 21Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[e] and he was called God’s friend. 24You see that a person is justified by what he does and not by faith alone.
25In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.
When I see scriptures like those, I can’t just ignore them. I thought of a way to try and explain to you how works fall into play in salvation, because the Bible clearly is showing some our necessary. We just have to reconcile it with the other scriptures that show that we cannot reach salvation of our own accord.
This is from a personal experience:
My friend had some tumors that were growing along her spine. They were extremely painful and caused her much distress and discomfort. She went to the doctor, and the doctor said that he could remove them. However, because she is a diabetic, before they could do the surgery, she needed to get her blood sugar down. They gave her two months and then she had another check up. She tried eating healthy, and taking care of herself to bring it down, but when she went back, the doctor told her that she hadn’t done enough because her blood sugar was too high still and so she couldn’t have the surgery. He make an appointment two months later for another check up. This time, she asked me if I could help her with her diet. Of course I a agreed and with her hard work and my direction, she got her blood sugar down in the allotted time, and she was cleared to have the surgery (which she had and everything went great).
My point in that story is this: The doctor said that for her to have the surgery, she needed to do something. She needed to bring her blood sugar down. Now, was reducing the blood sugar alone going to get rid of the tumors? Absolutely not! However, that doesn’t mean they were not essential to getting her “reward”, in this case her tumors removed.
The same thing with us. Obviously, nothing we can do can get rid of sin that we inherited in our body. No amount of works will do anything. However, that isn’t to say that we weren’t required to do any works. The scriptures above show the importance of works. The works are equivalent to us bringing down our blood sugar. It is still essential.
[quote]IrishSteel wrote:
mse2us - please don’t take this the wrong way. The point of exploring/explaining the history of the JW’s is to highlight several important facts - The JW’s started as an system of beliefs opposed to historical Christian teaching as demonstrated by the opposition to the Deity of Christ which causes the opposition to the trinity, to salvation by grace, and and host of other doctrines. This divorce from plain, historical Christian doctrine resulted in the “trail of errors” of the JW church.
This trail of errors has been repeatedly corrected and updated over the last 100 years, but it is precisely this constant calibration of beliefs that highlights for those of us on the outside just how twisted the belief structure of the JW has been and continues to be.
please understand, none of us doubt the sincerity and honesty of the average JW. I admire the intensity and study you have obviously put into understanding your faith. We are merely outside observers looking in at your experience and making observations.
But you also have to understand that we see JW as a corruption of the Christian faith, not a correction or improvement. The lineage of Doctrine we hold in our Christian faith goes back to Christ himself. We take the revealed truth literally and do not rely on a “updated” translation, but on the actual primary historical documents themselves - the plain teaching that we can discover for ourselves, not the “calibrated” teachings of men.
I hope that this does not sound harsh or judgemental - if so, I humbly apologize - I merely mean to express my thoughts in kindness. [/quote]
I appreciate your opinion Irish. Your are right our beliefs are different than mainstream Christianity and no we don’t deny the deity of Jesus because Jesus is a mighty god but the Bible shows that he is not God Almighty. Both you and Dmaddox say that the most popular teachings of Christianity have been around for centuries and because of that this makes them true. Unfortunately Irish that is the exact opposite of what the Bible says.
I gave the example of the wheat and the weeds illustration a couple of post ago. This illustration applies to the dominant Christian teachings that have been around for centuries.
Jesus said he would let the wheat grow with the weed until the conclusion of the system of things. Weeds alway overtake what every it grows with and dominants the other crop.
After the apostles died false teaching started to infiltrate Christian teachings and as I mentioned in one post Justin Marty as well as Origen Adamantius (185â??254) were two Christians who were Greek philosophers in the second century A.D. and thought that Christianity would be more appealing if it was blended with Greek philosophy and mythology into. For example, the immortality of the soul is one such teaching. Plato (428-348 B.C.), the Greek philosopher and student of Socrates, taught that the body and the “immortal soul” separate at death. The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology notes that Origen, an early and influential Catholic theologian, was influenced by Greek thinkers: “Speculation about the soul in the subapostolic church was heavily influenced by Greek philosophy. This is seen in Origen’s acceptance of Plato’s doctrine of the preexistence of the soul as pure mind (nous) originally, which, by reason of its fall from God, cooled down to soul (psyche) when it lost its participation in the divine fire by looking earthward” (1992, “Soul,” p. 1037).
Truly a weed like teaching that began in the second century A.D. and is the dominant belief of Christians.
God’s being worshiped in three or triads of god’s as I’m sure you know, began centures before the trinity teaching became official doctrine of the catholic church. It’s a historical fact that both Babylon and Egypt worshipped triad of god’s. Such as Osiris, Isis, and Horus for the Egyptians and of Sin, Shamash, and Ishtar for the Babylonians.
Even the Catholic Encyclopedia admits that that trinity teaching did not develop until the fourth century.
The New Catholic Encyclopedia (1967 edition, Vol. XIV, pp. 306, 304)states:
It is not, as already seen, directly and immediately the word of God." It also admits (on page 299): “The formulation ‘one God in three persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.”
“In Scripture there is yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word ‘Trias’ (of which the Latin ‘Trinitas’ is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about 180 AD… Shortly afterwards it appears in its Latin form of ‘Trinitas’ in Tertullian” (The Catholic Encyclopedia, 1912, Vol. 15, p. 47).
Another weed like teaching that began in ancient Babylon and Egypt, was not part of the christian congregation during the time of the apostles and infiltrated the Christian congregation after the death of the apostes and is now the dominant belief among Christians.
Irish, these are just some of the weeds that were planted and grew for centuries and eventually overtook the wheat and became the teachings that most of Christianity now believe.
The illustration at Matthew states that at the conclusion of the system of things the weeds will be separated from the wheat. Once they are separated they would be distinguishable by their teachings.
Irish notice what the book of Daniel states about knowledge and the time of the end.
Daniel 8:17(NIV):
"17 As he came near the place where I was standing, I was terrified and fell prostrate. “Son of man,” he said to me, “understand that the vision concerns the time of the end.”
Daniel 12:4(NIV):
“4 But you, Daniel, close up and seal the words of the scroll until the time of the end. Many will go here and there to increase knowledge.”
Daniel 12:9:
"9 And he went on to say: “Go, Daniel, because the words are made secret and sealed up until the time of the end. 10 Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will certainly act wickedly, and no wicked ones at all will understand; but the ones having insight will understand.”
Can you see what the above passages and the wheat and the weeds illustration have in common? Both talk about the time of the end. The wheat and the weeds won’t become distinguishable until the time of the end and the understanding of the book of Daniel which is key to understanding that Jesus was made king in heaven in 1914 will be kept secret until the time of the end.
My point is don’t be so sure based on the fact that this form of Christianity has been around for centuries and is the most popular form of Christianity. You really need to open your heart and mind to see that the main and most popular christian doctrines like the two I mentioned above were not taught in the original christian congregation when the apostles were alive and were planted as weeds once the apostles fell asleep in death.
[/quote]
And here’s what the Catholic Encyclopedia actually says about the Trinity and it’s proofs in and out of scripture.
Now I think it suffices to say for every extrapolated passage you provide, I can provide another that supports Father, Son and Holy Spirit manifestations of God.
Point is we can toss scripture back and forth all day long and never make head way.
Now, what I see is a bit of revisionist history. The Counsel of Nicaea in 325 AD was not as a result of perversion of doctrine but was designed to combat it. It was one of many such counsels as an early church struggles to get it’s legs under itself. Churches, often off the beaten path would often come up with there own theologies and scriptures. These counsel gathered to combat heresy.
Now history also states that the official doctrine of the Trinity existed before the canon of the Bible was established in the Synod of Carthage in 397 AD. Further, the New Covenant scriptures were written in conjunction with the growth of the early church.
The official Protestant versions of the Bible were not firmly established until 1820, when, sadly, the Apocrypha was removed.
The NWT translation appeared in 1961.
Historical Fact: the Holy Trinity was officially recognized before the two cannons of what makes up the modern Catholic Bible were assembled. The Protestant interpretations started with Martin Luther and officially excluded the Apocrypha in 1820. 1870 would be the birth of the JW interpretation of the Bible, which, the NWT I would argue takes great liberty with scripture, Jn 1:1 being a stark example.