Essential Christian Doctrines

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
There is no understanding of forgiveness in the Hindu doctrine of karma. It is most certainly not the same thing and that doctrine is used for some horribly evil things.

Never claimed that Hindu doctrine is the same as Christian,
but I do think the concept of karma can serve as a bridge to witnessing,
similar to how Paul witnessed to the horribly evil Athenians in Acts 17:22-31.
 
Of course.
But if it's the sin nature that makes one sin....
how did Adam sin if the sin nature did not exist yet?

There is no answer TruthDefender.

I shared an answer, and no one has refuted it or shared a better one.
 
Of course.
But if it's the sin nature that makes one sin....
how did Adam sin if the sin nature did not exist yet?

There is no answer TruthDefender.
I would say a sinfull nature desires to transgress God's laws, for sin is the transgression of the law.
In that respect, there was no sinfull nature in Eden until they ate from the apple that result)ed in them knowing good from evil(which could be viewed as right and wrong according to God's ways.)
But they were still in a body of flesh, which obviously could be tempted to do wrong and was
 
Never claimed that Hindu doctrine is the same as Christian,
but I do think the concept of karma can serve as a bridge to witnessing,
similar to how Paul witnessed to the horribly evil Athenians in Acts 17:22-31.
By using their term, they will use their understanding of it. That's nothing like what Paul did with the Athenians.
 
Of course.
But if it's the sin nature that makes one sin....
how did Adam sin if the sin nature did not exist yet?

There is no answer TruthDefender.

Through deception. Satan was already thrown out of heaven, so it existed. Who do you think deceived Eve?
And Eve didn’t say anything to Adam, she just gave it to him to eat, and he ate. Then both of their eyes were opened…..

Why make such a big deal with this?
 
Ummm, no we don't.

Let's take a look...
which confession do you use?

Let's try the baptist, 1689:

Chapter 3:1
1. From all eternity God decreed everything that occurs, without reference to anything outside himself.1 He did this by the perfectly wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably.

Yet God did this in such a way that he is neither the author of sin nor has fellowship with any in their sin.2 This decree does not violate the will of the creature or take away the free working or contingency of second causes. On the contrary, these are established by God’s decree.3 In this decree God’s wisdom is displayed in directing all things, and his power and faithfulness are demonstrated in accomplishing his decree.4



1. God decreed (caused) everything that occurs.
2. Yet God is not the author of sin.
3. God's will does not violate second causes..but they are, instead established.
4. God directs all things and His power is established in accomplishing His decree.

I do find the above to state conflicting ideas.
If God decreed everything that happens, that will necessarily include evil.
God establishes even second causes.

There are Calvinist teachers that clearly state that God created even evil.
Douglas and Piper would be two of them.
Piper said that even the dust in the air is directed by God.

Anyway, this is off topic and I do believe that the reformed faith teaches core Christian tenets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eli1
Let's take a look...
which confession do you use?

Let's try the baptist, 1689:

Chapter 3:1
1. From all eternity God decreed everything that occurs, without reference to anything outside himself.1 He did this by the perfectly wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably.


Yet God did this in such a way that he is neither the author of sin nor has fellowship with any in their sin.2 This decree does not violate the will of the creature or take away the free working or contingency of second causes. On the contrary, these are established by God’s decree.3 In this decree God’s wisdom is displayed in directing all things, and his power and faithfulness are demonstrated in accomplishing his decree.4


1. God decreed (caused) everything that occurs.
2. Yet God is not the author of sin.
3. God's will does not violate second causes..but they are, instead established.
4. God directs all things and His power is established in accomplishing His decree.

I do find the above to state conflicting ideas.
If God decreed everything that happens, that will necessarily include evil.
God establishes even second causes.

There are Calvinist teachers that clearly state that God created even evil.
Douglas and Piper would be two of them.
Piper said that even the dust in the air is directed by God.

Anyway, this is off topic and I do believe that the reformed faith teaches core Christian tenets.
I'm not "Calvinist." Some hyper-Calvinists do teach this, but they are a small minority.
 
I'm not "Calvinist." Some hyper-Calvinists do teach this, but they are a small minority.
No such animal NT.

If you want to be Calvinist...it's fine.
But you do need to accept what Calvinism teaches.
If you don't like what it teaches,,,then you should consider leaving that faith system.

Do you know WHY Augustine taught that man has no free will?
This was in the 5th century and free will had NEVER been debated in the church before him.

But maybe we'll discuss another day.
Up to you.
 
I would say a sinfull nature desires to transgress God's laws, for sin is the transgression of the law.
In that respect, there was no sinfull nature in Eden until they ate from the apple that result)ed in them knowing good from evil(which could be viewed as right and wrong according to God's ways.)
But they were still in a body of flesh, which obviously could be tempted to do wrong and was
No sir.

When God created, He said it was good.
When God created man, He said it was very good.
God does not lie.

Genesis 1:31
31 God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.


Also, it's accepted Christian theology that A and E were endowed with preternatural gifts.
They are:

ABSENCE OF THE SIN NATURE
IMMORTANLITY
INFUSED KNOWLEDGE

These were lost, of course, after the fall.
 
Through deception. Satan was already thrown out of heaven, so it existed. Who do you think deceived Eve?
And Eve didn’t say anything to Adam, she just gave it to him to eat, and he ate. Then both of their eyes were opened…..

Why make such a big deal with this?
No one is forcing you to reply.

It's an interesting subject for those that are interested.
 
No sir.

When God created, He said it was good.
When God created man, He said it was very good.
God does not lie.

Genesis 1:31
31 God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.


Also, it's accepted Christian theology that A and E were endowed with preternatural gifts.
They are:

ABSENCE OF THE SIN NATURE
IMMORTANLITY
INFUSED KNOWLEDGE

These were lost, of course, after the fall.
So how could they fall? Because they had the propensity to be tempted!
 
So how could they fall? Because they had the propensity to be tempted!
Jesus also had the propensity to be tempted.
But He did not sin because the sin nature did not exist in Jesus.

So why did Adam sin...
he had the propensity to be tempted...OK
but he actually sinned.

And the sin nature was not present yet in mankind.

This is just a an exercise in futility Undergrace.
Most persons don't think about this...
but there is NO ANSWER.
 
Jesus also had the propensity to be tempted.
But He did not sin because the sin nature did not exist in Jesus.

So why did Adam sin...
he had the propensity to be tempted...OK
but he actually sinned.

And the sin nature was not present yet in mankind.

This is just a an exercise in futility Undergrace.
Most persons don't think about this...
but there is NO ANSWER.
Well everyone is entitled to their view, including you and me! And there cannot be no answer, it is whether or not the answer is found!
 
No such animal NT.

If you want to be Calvinist...it's fine.
But you do need to accept what Calvinism teaches.
If you don't like what it teaches,,,then you should consider leaving that faith system.

Do you know WHY Augustine taught that man has no free will?
This was in the 5th century and free will had NEVER been debated in the church before him.

But maybe we'll discuss another day.
Up to you.
This is not the place, and I have no desire to discuss what hyper-Calvinists believe.

Also, I said I'm not a Calvinist. Will you acknowledge this, or bear false witness against me?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eli1
By using their term, they will use their understanding of it. That's nothing like what Paul did with the Athenians.

Yes it is (citing Greek gods as a bridge to witnessing for the true God is akin to citing karma as a bridge
to witnessing for the true Gospel of salvation).
 
LOL

When you've found it UG....
please advise!
Well Iv e already told you my view. They had the ability to be tempted and to give into temptation. But they did not have a sinfull nature as we would rationalise that nature to mean until they were aware of good and evil
Im sure you don't like my opinion, and if I am wrong, it isn't that much of a problem is it, this is hardly a salvational issue!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Toknow
Never claimed that Hindu doctrine is the same as Christian,
but I do think the concept of karma can serve as a bridge to witnessing,
similar to how Paul witnessed to the horribly evil Athenians in Acts 17:22-31.

Isn’t the term “witnessing” a JW term?