Reformist basics.

[Woody50]

Sin was found in Lucifer while he was in Heaven, the Sin of Pride. Satan was cast out of Heaven like thunderous Lightning; and the Word of God saw this. Lucifer's Nature was Fallen and he became the god of Lies. Sin entered the World in part due to Eve being deceived, but Adam is the first Sinner because when he ate the Forbidden Fruit they found themselves Naked and Afraid. They died at that moment; dying they shall die. Sin comes to us from breaking God's Covenant of Works. To Die Spiritually is a change of the Trichotomous Human Nature of Adam, which is a Live Body, Soul and Spirit; to the Trichotomous Human Nature of a Live Body and Soul with a dead spirit which needs to be Regenerated/Circumcized...

So...where did sin come from?

 

[ReverendRV]

So...where did sin come from?

The first Sin came from Lucifer the Archangel, he committed the Prideful Sin of wanting to be God. Saint James said that Desire gives birth to Sin. I would think that is a perfectly good and Biblical answer to where Sin comes from. If you want to discuss an alternate and 'just as true' answer, please name it...

I am a 5-Point Calvinist...

 

[ReverendRV]

I know you haven't thought this far. I've read your posts, and you just don't think much.

If God is the Creator of all things....where did sin come from?

The WCF says that God is not the Author of Sin, so I have thought it through...

I'm a 5-Point Calvinist, so I do much thinking...

 

[Woody50]

The WCF says that God is not the Author of Sin, so I have thought it through...

I'm a 5-Point Calvinist, so I do much thinking...

OH! The WCF?

Edit per mod

Sorry, I don't believe you.

Answer the question, please.

Woody, you may not attack another Christian for a different viewpoint from yours.

 

[ReverendRV]

OH! The WCF?

And because you have points, you do much thinking?

Sorry, I don't believe you.

Answer the question, please.

Since the WCF is a Confession of the Calvinistic Faith, shouldn't a Reformed Presbyterian confess that God is not the Author of Sin? If you are looking for me to tell you that Sin comes from God, I'm not going to tell you that. If you are looking for me to tell you an alternative answer to where Sin comes from, one I haven't named yet, please name it and I may just agree with you. The Bible's answer to your question is that Desire gives birth to Sin...

 

[ReverendRV]

I hear you.

Thanks...

 

[SovereignGrace]

Sin was found in Lucifer while he was in Heaven, the Sin of Pride. Satan was cast out of Heaven like thunderous Lightning; and the Divine Word of God saw this. Lucifer's Nature was Fallen and he became the god of Lies. Sin entered the World in part due to Eve being deceived, but Adam is the first Sinner because when he ate the Forbidden Fruit they found themselves Naked and Afraid. They died at that moment; dying they shall die. Sin comes to us as a Consequence of breaking God's Covenant of Works. To Die Spiritually is a change of the Trichotomous Human Nature of Adam, which is a Live Body, Soul and Spirit; to the Trichotomous Human Nature of a Live Body and Soul with a dead spirit which needs to be Regenerated/Circumcized...

Not to hijack the thread, but Lucifer was never in heaven. He is the king of Babylon.

 

[Manfred]

It’s a cooperative choice, a synergistic choice, not a mindless choice as Reformist theories promote.

You promote it. Not us. It is your Edit per mod conclusions you project.

We have a love relationship with God in which we give our all to Him and we find our all in Him.

There is nothing left of the old self. He is buried and dead, yet still tries to show himself from time to time.

In your theology, the old self is never buried and make decisions allways.
It is the Unbiblical view.

 

[Manfred]

Choosing to follow is not being lead? By choosing to be lead that means that I will be lead if God chooses to do so. There is a reason why we were gifted with minds to make choices.

No choosing to follow or not is not being lead.

If you have to choose to love your wife and children every day then you do not understand relationship at all.

We are in a love relationship with God, we also worship Him as our Lord. We are not equal to Him in that we have to decide if we want to follow His lead.

You are advocating your choices above obedience or subservience.
Is God not your LORD that you have to decide whether or not you want to be obedient.

 

[Manfred]

When aetheists choose to not believe God then it’s in God’s hands.

It is always in God's hand.
Your idea that God's actions are dependent on your "Sovereign" choices is obviously false.

Only the totally degenerated is incapable of knowing God. God’s invisible attributes are clearly seen by everyone who chooses to do so through his God-given faculties by the world He created.

Where is your context.

That's called tough love in modern day terminology.

So why accuse me?

 

[Synergy]

Couldn't care less how many points.

Where did sin come from?

Where do you think sin came from?

 

[Synergy]

You promote it. Not us. It is your depraved conclusions you project.

We have a love relationship with God in which we give our all to Him and we find our all in Him.

There is nothing left of the old self. He is buried and dead, yet still tries to show himself from time to time.

In your theology, the old self is never buried and make decisions allways.
It is the Unbiblical view.

Here is the Biblical view:
“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” (2 Corinthians 5:17)

Yes, the old man does show himself from time to time but my point is that we are now a new creature blessed with all the gifts and privileges that God has graciously bestowed on us all.

Reformist theories are air-tight in and of themselves – but once one shines the light of the NT on them then they all evaporate before his/her very eyes.

 

[Synergy]

No choosing to follow or not is not being lead.

If you have to choose to love your wife and children every day then you do not understand relationship at all.

We are in a love relationship with God, we also worship Him as our Lord. We are not equal to Him in that we have to decide if we want to follow His lead.

You are advocating your choices above obedience or subservience.
Is God not your LORD that you have to decide whether or not you want to be obedient.

Choosing to be lead puts you in a state of being lead. Choosing to be lead is by definition submitting to obedience and subservience. I don’t see why you cannot see that.

 

[Synergy]

Where is your context.

My source and context is the NT:
20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, (Romans 1:20-22)

God’s invisible attributes are clearly seen by everyone who chooses to do so according to Romans 1:20-22.

What is your source? You see, Reformist theories are air-tight in and of themselves – but once one shines the light of the NT on them then they all evaporate before his/her very eyes.

 

[Manfred]

Here is the Biblical view:
“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” (2 Corinthians 5:17)

Yes, the old man does show himself from time to time but my point is that we are now a new creature blessed with all the gifts and privileges that God has graciously bestowed on us all.

Reformist theories are air-tight in and of themselves – but once one shines the light of the NT on them then they all evaporate before his/her very eyes.

Like what? What theories?
So far the light has been shone on every objection you have made.

 

[Manfred]

My source and context is the NT:
20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, (Romans 1:20-22)

God’s invisible attributes are clearly seen by everyone who chooses to do so according to Romans 1:20-22.

What is your source? You see, Reformist theories are air-tight in and of themselves – but once one shines the light of the NT on them then they all evaporate before his/her very eyes.

So you believe every person knows God intimately.

You are not looking at context. Rather trying to prove that the Jews knew he was the king of glory and crucified Him anyway.

You also seem to be of the impression that Paul was uninformed and contradictory to what he wrote to the churches.

 

[Synergy]

Like what? What theories?

The Reformist theory that God’s invisible attributes are not clearly seen by everyone who chooses to do so through his God-given faculties by the world He created.
Try to keep up.

 

[Synergy]

So you believe every person knows God intimately.

Who said that? Try to stay within the context of Romans 1:20-22. Don't go off on tangents.

20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, (Romans 1:20-22)

You are not looking at context. Rather trying to prove that the Jews knew he was the king of glory and crucified Him anyway.

No, you're the one not looking at the totality of the the Book of Romans' context. Although there were many Jews who refused to acknowledge Christ as the Son of God, still there were many who did see Him clearly as the Son of God, the Messiah. One group made a catastrophic use of their God-given faculties and the other group made a proper use of their God-given faculties.

You also seem to be of the impression that Paul was uninformed and contradictory to what he wrote to the churches.

Once again I prove that: although Reformist theories are air-tight in and of themselves, once one shines the light of the NT on them then they all evaporate before his/her very eyes.

 

[Manfred]

My source and context is the NT:
20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, (Romans 1:20-22)

God’s invisible attributes are clearly seen by everyone who chooses to do so according to Romans 1:20-22.

What is your source? You see, Reformist theories are air-tight in and of themselves – but once one shines the light of the NT on them then they all evaporate before his/her very eyes.

So you believe every person knows God intimately.

You are not looking at context. Rather trying to prove that the Jews knew he was the king of glory and crucified Him anyway.

You also seem to be of the impression that Paul was uninformed and contradictory to what he wrote to the churches

The Reformist theory that God’s invisible attributes are not clearly seen by everyone who chooses to do so through his God-given faculties by the world He created.
Try to keep up.

You are the one having trouble keeping up.
What can be known of God through His creation?

You think they can know Jesus Christ as LORD and Savior through utilizing their natural faculties.

That is YOUR context of the Romans passage, not mine.
So why don't you try to keep up.

 

[Manfred]

Who said that? Try to stay within the context of Romans 1:20-22. Don't go off on tangents

I am. You are trying to prove that everyone can figure out that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior and that is what Roman's 1 teaches.

20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, (Romans 1:20-22

And. You say half the Jews figured it out by themselves, when Jesus said to Peter His lordship was revealed to Peter by God.

Why are you lying to people about that?

No, you're the one not looking at the totality of the the Book of Romans' context. Although there were many Jews who refused to acknowledge Christ as the Son of God, still there were many who did see Him clearly as the Son of God, the Messiah.

And you keep lying that they figured it out using their God given faculties and that it is not revelation.

One group made a catastrophic use of their God-given faculties and the other group made a proper use of their God-given faculties

This is an obvious lie.
None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
1 Corinthians 2:8‭, ‬12‭, ‬14 ESV

1 Corinthians 2:8-14 None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man ima | English Standard Version 2

None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man ima

bible.com

Once again I prove that: although Reformist theories are air-tight in and of themselves, once one shines the light of the NT on them then they all evaporate before his/her very eyes.

All you have been able to prove is that it is impossible for you to understand spiritual truth within scripture because you think you can understand it using your natural faculties.
You are against the scriptures and you keep lying to others.