Where do you find this in the Bible my friend? You are using no scripture to support your tabula rasa, Pelagian claims.
Where do I find what in the Bible, that Christians also physically die? This is a Pelagian claim? Really?
Where do you find this in the Bible my friend? You are using no scripture to support your tabula rasa, Pelagian claims.
Oh, so Adam and Eve would have died too, no matter what, even if they hadn't sinned. Lol!
Can you quote any verse saying that somebody is guilty in Adam or because of Adam? With the word "guilty".They are guilty in Adam. People are either in Adam or Jesus, there are no other options.
That is not what is written:Romans 9:13. Before they had anything good, bad or indifferent, God loved Jacob and hated Esau.
Tabula rasa is "blank slate" bro. That is what he is referring to, as if you are teaching each person is given a blank slate and are really only guilty and/or sinners once they personally sin. That is stemming from Pelagian thought. This isn't dealing with whether or not Christians die.Where do I find what in the Bible, that Christians also physically die? This is a Pelagian claim? Really?![]()
The tree of life was not there just for fun, bro![]()
I know what tabula rasa means, I have some basics in philosophyTabula rasa is "blank slate" bro. That is what he is referring to, as if you are teaching each person is given a blank slate and are really only guilty and/or sinners once they personally sin. That is stemming from Pelagian thought. This isn't dealing with whether or not Christians die.
Death came after sin, that's the wages for their sinning; Romans 6:23 thus in their state of sinlessness they would have never died. You believe Adam and Eve would have died anyhow, right?
You seem to be missing a lot of Gospel truth and doctrine from Romans i.e. original sin, guilt in Adam, federal headship, death through sin, whole world lost &c; Romans 3-6. But like I stated before you rarely use any Scripture.
I know what tabula rasa means, I have some basics in philosophy,
No, I believe that Adam and Eve would eat from the tree of life, would be transformed and live for ever with bodies similar to ours after resurrection.
Gospel is not about physical death.
You read Romans in a wrong sense, I think. But you would have to tell me more closely about how you read it.
That's good. Perhaps I am not understanding your English.
OK, maybe I used too many "would".
I believe that Adam and Eve would be allowed to eat from the tree of life, after their success in the temptation. This tree (whatever it is, a symbol, a metaphor , a literal tree, Christ...) would somehow transform their bodies from physical ones to the ones similar to bodies we will get after our resurrection, i.e. they would get spiritual bodies that do not die.
That is not what is written:
Romans 9:
10 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;
11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )
12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
What was said before they were born was "the elder shall serve the younger".
What is written in Rom 9:10-12 is a reference to Gen 25:23 And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger.
Do you know when it was written "Esau have I hated"? It was not until Malachi 1:3.
Also, in Rom 9:13 the word "hated" is the Greek word miséō. According to HELPS Word-studies, miséō is defined as follows:
to detest (on a comparative basis); hence, denounce; to love someone or something less than someone (something) else, i.e. to renounce one choice in favor of another.Lk 14:26: "If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate (3404/miséō, 'love less' than the Lord) his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple".
Thayer's defines miséō as follows:
Romans 9:13, the signification to love less, to postpone in love or esteem, to slight
Can you quote any verse saying that somebody is guilty in Adam or because of Adam? With the word "guilty".
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (Romans 5:12)
Sin, and consequently death, passed upon all Adam’s posterity due to his rebellious act in the Garden. Babies die in the womb due to his sin. We have sicknesses in our land due to his sin.
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.(1 Corinthians 15:22)
Everybody born is born in Adam. They will die a physical death regardless they are a saint or sinner. Babies die due to being in Adam. Those who die still be in Adam, will taste the second death. The saved are no longer in Adam, but Christ. They still die physically, but never taste the second death. Why? They are in Christ.
Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate [Greek μισέω (miseō)] not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.μισέω (miseō)
to hate, regard with ill-will, Mt. 5:43, 44; 10:22; to detest, abhor, Jn. 3:20; Rom. 7:15; in NT to regard with less affection, love less, esteem less, Mt. 6:24; Lk. 14:26
Thank you for your response, my friend. But when we say hate does not mean hate, we open the doors to accepting things like love does not really mean love but to hate less.
Now you're changing Scripture to support your doctrine rather than change your doctrine in order to follow Scripture. Poor workmanship (2 Tim 2:15).Sackcloth-N-Ashes said:Jacob I have hated less, but Esau I hated.
No my friend. If love means love then hate means hate. God does not hate us less than those who die lost. His wrath will be poured out on the vessels of wrath(Romans 9). I am not doing poor workmanship my friend.Luke 14:26 If any man come to me, and hate [Greek μισέω (miseō)] not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.
Do you really believe Jesus is telling His disciples to "hate" his/her father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, and him/herself?
And look at what Jesus tells us in Matthew 5:
43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate [Greek μισέω (miseō)] thine enemy.
44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?
48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Following your analogy / understanding, God tells us to do something He is unwilling to do. He tells us to love our enemies, bless them, do good to them, pray for them. But in your analogy / understanding, God did not do the same for Esau.
And you have to completely remove Matt 5:45 from Scripture.
Are you aware that God gave Esau an inheritance?
Deuteronomy 2:
4 And command thou the people, saying, Ye are to pass through the coast of your brethren the children of Esau, which dwell in Seir; and they shall be afraid of you: take ye good heed unto yourselves therefore:
5 Meddle not with them; for I will not give you of their land, no, not so much as a foot breadth; because I have given mount Seir unto Esau for a possession [Hebrew ְ רֻשָּׁ֣ה yə-ruš-šāh = possession, inheritance].
Joshua 24:4 And I gave unto Isaac Jacob and Esau: and I gave unto Esau mount Seir, to possess it; but Jacob and his children went down into Egypt.
Now you're changing Scripture to support your doctrine rather than change your doctrine in order to follow Scripture. Poor workmanship (2 Tim 2:15).
Based upon the above statement, 1 John 3:1 is yet another verse which needs to be removed from Scripture in order to prop up your erroneous doctrine.God does not hate us less than those who die lost.
Based upon the above statement, 1 John 3:1 is yet another verse which needs to be removed from Scripture in order to prop up your erroneous doctrine.
1 John 3:1 Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God
And while you're at it, why not just tear 1 John 4:10 out of your Bible:
1 John 4:10 Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us
So according to your doctrine, we are to "hate" our father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, and ourselves?You are missing my point, my friend. If hate does not mean hate, then how do we know love really means love? All then becomes subjective and not objective.