The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Original Sin

I have a question that's troubling me.

Was Original Sin just imputed to Adam and his children after the fall, or was it imputed and infused, therefore creating a "sinful nature" in men?

What exactly happened or changed in Adam, or was it a change not in Adam, but a change in Adam in his relationship to God and God's guiding and protecting Spirit?

The theological implications in this questions are immense.

Sorry, I forgot to add this. I realize that there is another thread going on on this subject, but I wanted this thread confined to my single question.


Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Denny.

I believe that when Adam fell and became responsible to God for his action his whole nature turned immediately around and he became totally depraved, a lover of iniquity and a hater of God.

Although Adam could not sin very much yet, adultery, steal, get drunk he was still totally depraved.

Original sin in his descendents I believe is imputed and yet man develops in time more and more ways to sin yet all men are equally totally depraved by nature.

Romans 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.


The word infusion seems to imply something gradual.





OK so I'm not a theologian.
Williams <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/my2cents.gif" alt="" />

.

Thanks William for your contribution and I think it's a very good start on this subject.


This is exactly what I believed until I recently read an article by A.W. Pink from the The Sovereignty of God. The following comments are from appendix 2 in that book.


And later in the same appendix:


Note Pink's words that if God had injected or infused into Adam or His children a "depraved" nature, God would legally be accountable or responsible for Adam's sins and the sins of his children.

Something else is going on here and this is the point of my confusion.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Denny,

Is it possible you are confusing what Adam's and Eve's condition was BEFORE the Fall with that AFTER the Fall? Pink was focusing upon the relationship of God, man and the Fall before Adam's transgression, i.e., God cannot be found guilty of making or forcing Adam to sin just because He ordained that he would. Pink makes it very clear that God did not alter Adam's nature so that he had no choice to not sin but did so under irresistible compulsion out of his own corrupt nature. No... Adam was created upright, aka: very good; perfect. Our first parents had the ability to sin (posse peccare) and the ability to not sin (posse non peccare) but they were not guaranteed that they would not sin (non posse non peccare).

Now, after the Fall, what God promised in His warning took place, "And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." (Genesis 2:16-17) Thus, on that very day, Adam and Eve "died", which we understand as being a 3-fold death: spiritual (immediate), temporal (gradual), and eternal (final condemnation). This "curse" or punishment that came upon Adam and all his posterity, we call "Original Sin". It consists of two parts: 1) Depravity/corruption of nature and 2) Guilt. All descendants of Adam are born with a corrupt nature (Total Depravity); it is inherited. And, all descendants of Adam have his guilt imputed to them; i.e., all are guilty before God in Adam, just as if they had been the one to eat of the fruit of that tree. (cf. Rom 5:12-18)

Does this help?

Pilgrim,

Thanks for your answer but it still does not answer my fundamental question.


The word "impute" (credited) is my problem!

Now, if we Reformed use the word "impute" (credited in the eyes of God with the righteousness of His own son) to slay the RCC dragon of infused righteousness, how may we by using the same concept and word, give life to a dragon of infused depravity or a "sinful nature"?

As I said, this fundamental question "imputed guilt" is no small theological matter.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Denny,

I'm sorry to say that I'm confused at this point.

1) "Inherited" corruption of nature is not synonymous with "Infused" corruption, nor "Infused" righteousness. The Reformed Faith holds to no doctrine of infused anything. All of Adam's race are born with a corrupt nature.

2) What does this have to do with "Imputation"; guilt or righteousness? If there is no imputed guilt, then there is no salvation since it depends totally upon Christ's righteousness being imputed to the sinner upon repentance and faith in Christ.

Can you clarify what you are having a problem with? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His grace,

I'll try to say this again, as clearly as I can.

Do we Reformed not know and affirm from Scripture that the RCC has violently missinterpreted the words "imputed righteousness" to mean an actual or in fact "infused" righteousness? Yes, of course we do and rightfully so.

What I am struggling with is whether or not the Reformed have missinterpreted "imputed guilt" as an actual or in fact "infused" corruption of the nature of men by God. Or, is it possible by reasoning from the Scripture that the only thing that really changes in our world, by reason of obedience in Christ or disobedience in Adam, is the withdrawing or the bestowal of God's favorable and gracious administration of our world. Does our corrupted world now deliver thorns and thistles to us because it no longer reflects God's administration but the unrighteous administration of Adam and his children?

Was the monstrous sin of Adam not simply a wish for his own deification, a disbelief in God's righteous goodness and a fateful wish to "go it" by his own unrighteous administration? Thus, the expulsion from God's Garden.

The bottom line of my present struggle is as Pink says, and if I might paraphrase, that if God had infused a corrupted nature into Adam or his children, God would then be legally accountable and responsible for their sins.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

I tend to think of it in terms of a genetic disease. God's law of creation is that all creatures reproduce after their own kind. Adam, made in the image of God, marred that image with his rebellion and contracted the "disease" of the corruption of his nature - a false image of God if you will - and passed it along to all of his posterity. It is inherited like diabetes, not "infused" from some outside source.

Is that helpful?

Robin said:
"I tend to think of it in terms of a genetic disease. God's law of creation is that all creatures reproduce after their own kind. Adam, made in the image of God, marred that image with his rebellion and contracted the "disease" of the corruption of his nature - a false image of God if you will - and passed it along to all of his posterity. It is inherited like diabetes, not "infused" from some outside source."


Robin, thanks for your reply but what you have just said is what I’ve always believed myself until recently challenged by the Scripture.

I would never argue that a disease cannot be inherited as well as caught by the individual somewhere in a jungle. In fact this proves my point. Inherited disease is often passed to one son but not to another.

IMO, the truth is that God still holds men responsible for their "disease" of sin, as any good Calvinist will tell you. This is regardless of whether they live in a world of good and evil or not. He could not hold us responsible for our sin even if He had allowed sin to be passed on in an inherited manner. We do not hold anyone morally responsible who has inherited a disease.

We do, or should know that in God’s administration before the fall of Adam that the choice of evil was forbidden and forbidden with the penalty of death. Adam rejected His beautiful government’s administration by his willful sin in the garden of our gracious God. We should also know that true free will, and therefore freedom itself, does not lay in our libertarian choice between good and evil but the righteous ability to chose only that which is good.

Perhaps we might consider that what we inherited is not sin or a "sinful nature" but the corrupt and condemned political administration of good and evil (our present world) of Adam and his children that allows deception and often, if not always, encourages the choice of evil.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Inherited traits are always inherited. Humans produce humans. Adam's corrupted nature is inherited by all his descendants. It is the inability to not sin that is inherited by Adam's posterity.

Before the Fall, Adam had the ability to not sin. Following the Fall, Adam and his descendants are unable to not sin. Only the regenerate are restored to Adam's state before the Fall. The Bible calls it being "dead in trespasses and sins," not "sick." The natural man is helpless, a slave to his inherited nature - a slave to sin.

"Total depravity" does not mean that the man is immersed totally in depravity, but that the man himself - the total man - is depraved, body and soul. He is capable only of evil. His nature must be changed first (through death and rebirth - accomplished for us by the second Adam, Christ - before he is capable of anything else.

Is that helpful?

Robin,

My precious Brother,

I already know what you believe, as I believed the exact same things but a short time ago. My question and struggle is with that very belief.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Denny,

I think we're all struggling with what your struggle here is. How does God become legally accountable for Adam's sin which results in spiritual death to all mankid??

I guess I don't understand what you are struggling with. Rather than try to state the doctrine in different ways without really understanding the question, I will withdraw until you can articulate questions I can reply to without simply restating the familiar.

We both know that God became legally accountable and responsible for our sins by becoming incarnate man and sacrificing Himself for His people.

My trouble is that I now know our broken world may be looked at in two ways.

The first way is by believing that it is populated by people who are sinners by nature. I now believe that the consequences of this belief cannot help but take its toll in our attitude and respect towards our God, our neighbors or ourselves.

The second way is by looking at our world as being populated by people who are sinners by an oppressive administration of deceit and evil. There is no truth in it but the truth of our spiritual need which the world deceitfully provides at the expense of our own ignorance. A world where all men cry out like lost dogs, without a master for food and discipline. Many even regress to becoming unpardonable spiritual or literal wolves. A world where nature itself does not care, with a single tear, whether someone lives or dies forever. All of this except by the grace of God.

When I first heard and believed the Biblical doctrine of Justification by Faith (in the work of Christ) Alone, my knees nearly buckled with joy. I now believe my joy was so intense,... that I soon believed if the Reformed could show me this absolutely liberating truth they could do no wrong elsewhere. This was my idolatry.

Kyle, please pray for me.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Denny,

What you are considering, or perhaps you have already embraced is indefensible from Scripture. To deny the inherent corruption of an individual's nature/soul is of necessity to deny the perfect righteousness of Christ and the need to have it imputed unto salvation. In short, the entire doctrine of salvation is brought into question for all its various parts are inseparable. Looking at this second way it makes all men victims of a sinful world to which they would rather not be associated with and which is oppressing their seemingly inherent good nature. Thus there is no need for regeneration of the individual soul but rather a liberation from a wicked and evil world that encompasses them. I would challenge you to present a biblical argument in its defense. And, have you had the opportunity to read this: The Sinfulness of Original Sin?

And where is this "elsewhere" which you now believe historic biblical Protestantism has erred? And what group, philosophy, religion has convinced you otherwise? My dear brother, what you are now proposing, i.e., what you now know is so seriously contrary to biblical truth that my heart is struck with fear for your soul. Let me allow the apostle Paul's own words express my present state of concern:

Galatians 1:6-9 (ASV) "I marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called you in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel; which is not another [gospel] only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let him be anathema. As we have said before, so say I now again, if any man preacheth unto you any gospel other than that which ye received, let him be anathema."

3:1-4 "O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was openly set forth crucified? This only would I learn from you. Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now perfected in the flesh? Did ye suffer so many things in vain? if it be indeed in vain."

Romans 8:9-10 (ASV) "But ye are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you. But if any man hath not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ is in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the spirit is life because of righteousness."

In His grace,

Brother,

The way I look at this question is this: our nature was corrupted by the Fall and that we inherit this corrupted nature from our parents (sort of "spiritual DNA") just as surely as we inherit our physical characteristics. In my mind that avoids the problem with which you seem to be wrestling, and upholds the doctrine of original sin.

May God bless you as you work through these things.

Theo

Pilgrim,

Thank you my brother for your care and concern for me. Judging from the time that it took you for your post, I know you very carefully considered your words.


It is my present belief that to deny an infused corruption of our soul does not deny the righteousness of Christ. Men, even Adam in the garden before the fall, have never had true righteousness without the covering of God's justification. This is the very reason that after the sin of Adam, our first parents reallized that they were naked. What happened in the garden was not the destruction of Adam's will and nature nor the nature of his children, but a change in his status, in God's eyes, from being on probation, to his expulsion from the garden to a prison on death row (our present world).

I read Shedd's article and he says this:


If Adam had received all of God's endowments of freedom why did he sin? It may be easily argued that Adam had "total depravity" before the fall. This proves that man has never had true freedom apart from the justifying righteousness and/or the authority of his Creator Alone.


As I have already stated in my posts the "elsewhere" is in the Reformed doctrine of a corrupted or "sinful nature". They have taken the word "imputed" to literally mean "infused". In the second part of your question, "who has convinced you otherwise" may be turned around by me to ask you the very same question; Who or what religion has convinced you that we are totally depraved? It is my assertion, by my present understanding that the Scripture teaches we are not totally depraved but totally incabable of justifying ourselves with an inherant deified righteousness and never have been. This absolutely includes Adam before the fall.


I knew the second that I posted this thread that the conversation would eventually degenerate into this. This is an un-Christian judgment towards your brother who believes with all his heart in the justifying righteousness of Christ Jesus alone.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Denny, my brother,

I must concur with what Jeff has said regarding the fear for your soul. What you are saying is directly opposite the truth of Scripture and does indeed have a profound impact on how you understand what it means to be justified by faith alone. You have rightly, I think, sensed that this is not minor disagreement but goes to the heart of the Christian religion, that is, how may we be reconciled to God?


Will you please show how this is? This indeed seems to be what Paul believed, for example, per Rom. 3. And what effect did it have on his attitude and respect toward God, his neighbors, and himself? We are all sinners, born in sin, deserving the wrath of God. We are all in the same boat! But God, being rich in mercy, has determined to love and to save some of these poor sinners in spite of them being enemies toward Him. And these He also conforms to the image of His Son.


Denny, sin lies within each and every man.

Gen. 6:5: "Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. "

Ps. 51:5: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me."

Mark 7:20-23: "And He was saying, 'That which proceeds out of the man, that is what defiles the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed the evil thoughts, fornications, thefts, murders, adulteries, deeds of coveting and wickedness, as well as deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride and foolishness. All these evil things proceed from within and defile the man.'"

Rom. 3:9-18: "What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; as it is written, 'There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one.' 'Their throat is an open grace, with their tongues they keep deceiving,' 'the poison of asps is under their lips'; whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness'; 'their feet are swift to shed blood, destruction and misery are in their paths, and the path of peace they have not known.' 'There is no fear of God before their eyes.'"

Eph. 2:1-3: "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest."


I do not see that Reformed theology has done wrong here, my friend. Indeed, were it not for the truth of Total Depravity which was the one thing I knew to be true, I would not count myself Reformed today.


I will, brother.

Kyle,

Thanks for your post and future prayers.


Kyle I'm sorry but I can almost say that this is off thread.

The Lord knows that I know I am a sinner.

The issue remains on whether we are still free moral agents with total responsibility for our sins with punishment due in our own person, that is, unless our sins have been propituated. My charge is that if God had given us or even allowed a changed or corrupted "sinful nature", God logically then, becomes the author of sin.


This is true because we are sinners of necessity in this world. We are born ignorant of what should be to us obvious. It is not that we are not still created "good" and in God's image but that we have been condemned to a world in which we are "on our own" and sinfully believing that we have no need of God's gracious justification, guidance and authority. This was the wish of Adam in his original sin. And this is why we must be born again.

Calvin agrees with this in his Short Treatise:


This is exactly what Adam did, as he was not deceived, and this is exactly what the Lord did in giving Adam and Eve their own world under their own administration that He had created. In His infinite wisdom He gave Adam and therefore Adam's children their heart's desire without changing their nature in any way.

Jesus also agrees that this is what God would do, in Matthew 5:40:


We must remember that the sin of Adam was in the legal context of the covenant of works. Adam's sin was therefore the world's first lawsuit.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Contained in the doctrine of total depravity is not only that the world is populated with people who are sinners and are sinning, Arminians believe that, but that <span style="background-color:#FFFF00">the world is filled with people who are already condemned</span> except they be regenerated by the power of God.

Therefore as <span style="background-color:#FFFF00">by the offence of one [color:"FF0000"]judgment[/color]</span> came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. Romans 5:18


.

Denny,

1) ALL men are born as "free moral agents"! Calvinism not only denies the contrary but is the one system which stresses it more than another other, thus making ALL men responsible for their individual choices. However, there is a vast chasm between being a "free moral agent" and having a "free will", i.e., the ability to choose contrary to one's nature. A free moral agent has total freedom to choose according to his desires which flow from one's nature. If that nature is spiritual dead (corrupt, depraved), then it will and CAN only choose sin.

2) Let's take your proposition that if "God had given us or even allowed a changed or corrupted sinful nature, God logically then, becomes the author of sin" and apply it to another example. If a father sets defined parameters within his household to which his children must comply, else receive punishment and a child violates one of those rules, the child is legally subject to the punishment for that violation. Not many would argue that the father has no right to punish the child. But the punishment given does not make the father guilty of the child's transgression.

Likewise, God told Adam that in the very day he ate of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, he would surely die; i.e., he would suffer a tri-fold death: spiritual, physical and eternal. That spiritual death we call "total depravity", aka: a corrupt nature. This corruption effected Adam and Eve in their "predisposition/inclination" toward God. Where originally, they were predisposed/inclined to love God and to seek after perfect obedience before Him. Should they disobey the singular law given them, that disposition/inclination would be forfeited. Now, is it logical that God can be charged with being guilty of sin because Adam sinned? or that Adam received the just punishment due to his transgression? NO.... may God be true and all men liars. God did not CREATE Adam with a corrupt nature; he was created "very good". Adam suffered the punishment DUE as a result of his transgression. An earthly Judge is not guilty of some heinous crime for sentencing a convicted murderer to death. God could have vaporized Adam and Eve if He willed. Rather He chose to simply remove that which was given to Adam out of His own good pleasure.

Romans 9:14-24 (ASV) "What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that hath mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, For this very purpose did I raise thee up, that I might show in thee my power, and that my name might be published abroad in all the earth. So then he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus? Or hath not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel unto honor, and another unto dishonor? What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction: and that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he afore prepared unto glory, [even] us, whom he also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles?"

It was also God's perfect will to appoint Adam as the Federal Head of the human race. And, thus whatever Adam chose to do would have a lasting affect upon all his progeny. (cf. Rom 5:12-18) And it is upon this very principle of corporate solidarity (Federal Headship) that sinners are saved in Christ. To deny the former of necessity denies the latter. Deny Adam's headship, his transgression with the commensurate punishment of depravity and guilt upon himself and all who are born of him, is to deny Christ's headship and the blessing of salvation upon all those who are given to believe upon Him.

Lastly, I would still like to know who, what and/or where you have come upon this evil influence that has evidently caused you to fall away from the truth which is in Christ Jesus?

In His grace,

Denny,

1) An "infused" corruption means to 'add to that which is already existent'. And even IF that were true, for arguments sake, the end result is the same... i.e., the nature is corrupted.

2) Could you please provide biblical support for your proposition that "Adam before the Fall... never had true righteousness without the covering of God's justification"? Such a proposal would mean that Adam possessed some measure of guilt, i.e., he had transgressed a law of God and needed an alien "righteousness". I find no such teaching, but perhaps I have missed it over the years?

3) Would you please exegete Genesis 2:16,17 for me please?

"And Jehovah God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die."

4) The Garden of Eden was part of God's created world. It was simply a place made for Adam and Eve to dwell. Due to Adam's transgression the entire world was subjected to corruption (Gen 3:17b-18a; Rom 8:19-22) and metaphorically groans and awaits its redemption. There is no biblical warrant to bifurcate the Garden of Eden from the rest of the earth.

1) Why did Adam sin? If you are able to answer that one, you will be the first in history to do so. The greater question is, How did Satan sin since he too was created perfect and additionally had no outside evil influence to entice him to rebel against God.

2) Again, it remains for you to show from Scripture that Adam needed an alien righteousness before the Fall.

3) No creature has freedom (autonomy) that is not under the direct authority of God, Who is the blessed Creator of all. Surely, I need not supply the plethora of biblical passages that show this to be incontrovertibly true.

No one nor any religion convinced me that I was totally depraved. a) On the intellectual perspective, it was from my own private reading of the Scriptures that I came to know the truth about not only the depravity of nature of the entire human race, but also b) through the convicting work of the Holy Spirit speaking to my mind, heart and soul in the Scriptures read.

The onus is upon you now to show from Scripture that all the confessions, creeds and catechisms of all the Reformational churches are universally wrong in their understanding of the doctrine of both Original Sin and the doctrine of Total Depravity. I wish you well in your attempt. If you feel incapable of doing so yet feel someone else has succeeded in refuting these things, could you please provide a link to a source?

In His grace,

Denny, logically, to avoid the charge of "author of sin" against God in your understanding here would require that God be something less than absolutely sovereign over His creation. The problem for you remains that there is indeed sin in this world, whether or not that sin indwells individual human beings rather than oppressing them from without as you seem to be proposing.


There is no "infusion" of a sinful nature. God didn't make men sinful! Men are sinners in themselves from conception because they are sinners in Adam from the Fall. Adam forfeited his righteousness, and the righteousness of all in him, in that first sin. All men hence are born unrighteous, with hearts fundamentally opposed to God, not merely ignorant.

As our Lord Jesus said, what defiles a man proceeds out from his own heart.

I don't think you've really thought this through, Denny. It is evident you've been influenced by someone or something recently, but this is the devil's work. Be wary of it, do not be captivated by his wiles.

My brother, my heart is breaking because I really think you have fallen under some kind of deception! Please do not brush off what I am saying.

Pilgrim,


Yes, I agree that we are born spiritually dead in this world as a result of the sin of Adam. Why can't we say instead, that we cannot choose righteousness because we don't even know what it is, nor did Adam before the fall. We are not sinners because of a defect in our nature or "depraved" but because we have lost God's justifying righteousness. Adam was created "good" and as long as he was obedient, he was covered by God's life giving justification. We cannot justify ourselves by our own obedience nor could Adam even before the fall. I believe that this is what the tree of life was for.

Why do you insist that the limitations (inability to justify ourselves) yet pronounced goodness of our nature has changed, when what has changed is the withdrawal of God's gracious and life giving favor towards Adam and his children due to disobedience? This is what the words "imputed sin" means. Not in us (because we were created good) but credited to us because of our sure disobedience of necessity (sin) to come in a corrupted world that we have inherited from our father Adam.

To put this in another way is to say that sin comes naturally to us in this world, not because of our nature (which was created and remains good and in His image) but because of our fear and knowledge of God's just judgment of death. It is the fear of death that encourages men to hate their Creator and justify or attempt to deify themselves at the expense and even murder of others. It is the fear of death that drives people insane and it is the fear of death in our corrupted world that ultimately drives people to unbelief and unrepentant sin.

Finally I must say this once again. I believe that for us to believe that God put something in us to make us sinners, or that our neighbor has a "sinful nature" or that we have a "corrupted nature" in ourselves, is a mishandling of God's words in Scripture. To say this only gives us reason to be suspicious of God's goodness, to hate our neighbor and to bring an evil psychological sword against our own person. I believe the truth is that we corrupt ourselves into bondage by sin, and bondage is against our very own nature.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24

Denny,

Okay, so you have stated several times WHAT you believe, which is not only contrary to Reformed theology but even Arminian theology. What you have not done is to support this view from Scripture. From what you have written, it sounds nearly that what Pelagius was teaching in the 4th century and which has been universally rejected as damnable heresy. I for one, and I suspect there are many others who would really like to know (3rd time asking) WHERE and/or from WHOM you have gotten this strange view(s). I cannot believe you have had a complete change of mind from reading the Scriptures in solitude.

In His grace,

Pilgrim,


I just don't have the will to continue this argument at least at this time. I need some time to rest and reflect about what was said. It suffices to say that I do not now believe "Calvinism" has a perfect system in all matters of our faith as you claim. My crisis and trouble is not in my faith in the Scripture but in my blind faith in the total of Reformed thought. You are right, that what I've been trying to say is not Reformed, nor Arminian. nor is it Pelegian as I clearly stated that is is impossible for us to justify ourselves with our own limited free will by obedience to God's commands.

I will reply to your last question in a private message as this is where I think, at least at present, it belongs.

Denny

Romans 3:22-24