Charles Spurgeon's Sanity Litmus Test (are you insane?)

Stranger said:

I know I am entitled to my opinion. That is not the point.

We disagree, so why is there nothing to debate.

Explain (Rom. 5:13-14) to mean other than what I have said it means. Because it disproves your statements and proves that we are guilty of Adams sin.

Stranger

Click to expand...

It's not my style to debate someone who has a legitimate understanding of a verse, although it may NOT be my own (not MY OWN, but what I've been taught - I don't make up doctrine).

But if you want to understand better, here it is:

Romans 5:13-14

New American Standard Bible
13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

In verse 12 we're told that SIN entered into the world by one man, Adam, and thus DEATH also entered. Physical death and spiritual death.

Since Adam represents all mankind, his sin has cause all of us to be born dead to God.

verse 13
Since there was not yet any law, men were not held responsible for Adam's sin, they were not imputed with Adam's sin, but they were still born separated from God and considered sinners by Him.
Romans 1:19-20 explain this well.

verse 14
That which is know about God is evident from creation. Even though there was no law, man could still see the divine power of God, if he wanted to, and so salvation was available even then for those who believed in a God they might not have even known by name.
So though there was no law (the decalogue) to break, man still was affected by sin, due to Adam's sin. But he did not commit the first sin, Adam did. They did not disobey any SPECIFIC command of God, but were born sinners anyway. This is called the sin nature. An effect of O.S.

Since all mankind is now born with the sin nature, we are born sinners.
Verse 13 cleary states that sin is not imputed.
The effect of Adam's sin, the sin nature, is imputed to us.

Marymog said:

Hi GG,

Men of The Church did go astray and were sinful. That does not make the doctrines of The Church wrong or corrupt The Truth.

If the standard is 'some of the men of the church became corrupt that means the entire teaching/doctrine/dogma of the church is corrupt' then EVERY denomination (Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Pentecostal etc.) is corrupt.

Yours and my entire family tree is corrupt based on that standard.

What do you mean "small c" when referring to 'the church'? Does 'small c' mean all Christians?

IHS....Mary

Click to expand...

Agreed.
small c.
Church -- the Body of Christ (all believers)
church -- the bldg. and administration, magesterium, whatever it's called for each denomination.

DPMartin said:

salvation is for the faithful not the intellectual, though a intellectual can be faithful but that's kinda like the Lord says about a rich man's chances for heaven.

Click to expand...

You mean if I'm intelligent and rich I can't go to heaven!!

My brother is an intellectual, he's saved.
I know what you mean, it's the spirit that counts.
But it's OK to be intelligent too.

Rich persons have a difficult time getting to heaven, not because they're rich, but because they have no need to stop and think where their goods come from, who to thank. They have no need to think about God.

This is why God is many times found when we hit bottom. It makes us stop and reflect on exactly what life is all about.

DPMartin said:

and this is because they want to believe that they are good, and have the capacity for good. but that is imposable for man. as Jesus says only God is good, therefore they don't have the capacity for good. only God dose. but if their god in their image has the capacity for sin, then they are justified without Jesus Christ. and your right it does sound like Catholicism doesn't it.

Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. That's your blind prejudice talking.
Many Protestants today realize that Catholics adhere to the idea of salvation sola gratia (by grace alone), but fewer are aware that Catholics do not have to condemn the formula of justification sola fide (by faith alone), provided this phrase is properly understood.

The term pistis is used in the Bible in a number of different senses, ranging from intellectual belief (Romans 14:22, 23, James 2:19, to assurance Acts 17:31, and even to trustworthiness or reliability (Romans 3:3, Titus 2:10. Of key importance is Galatians 5:6, which refers to “faith working by charity.” In Catholic theology, this is what is known as fides formata or “faith formed by charity.” The alternative to formed faith is fides informis or “faith unformed by charity.” This is the kind of faith described in James 2:19, for example.

Whether a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone depends on what sense the term “faith” is being used in. If it is being used to refer to unformed faith then a Catholic rejects the idea of justification by faith alone (which is the point James is making in James 2:19 as every non-antinomian Evangelical agrees; one is not justified by intellectual belief alone).

However, if the term “faith” is being used to refer to faith formed by charity then the Catholic does not have to condemn the idea of justification by faith alone. In fact, in traditional works of Catholic theology, one regularly encounters the statement that formed faith is justifying faith. If one has formed faith, one is justified. Period.

A Catholic would thus reject the idea of justification sola fide informi but wholeheartedly embrace the idea of justification sola fide formata. Adding the word “formed” to clarify the nature of the faith in “sola fide” renders the doctrine completely acceptable to a Catholic.

Given the different usages of the term “faith” in the Bible, the early Church had to decide which meaning would be treated as normative. Would it be the Galatians 5 sense or the Romans 14/James 2 sense? The Church opted for the latter for several reasons:
Justification by Faith Alone

Must you be so hostile, DPMartin? The Church you despise is a cardboard caricature, it isn't real.

GodsGrace said:

It's not my style to debate someone who has a legitimate understanding of a verse, although it may NOT be my own (not MY OWN, but what I've been taught - I don't make up doctrine).

But if you want to understand better, here it is:

Romans 5:13-14

New American Standard Bible
13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

In verse 12 we're told that SIN entered into the world by one man, Adam, and thus DEATH also entered. Physical death and spiritual death.

Since Adam represents all mankind, his sin has cause all of us to be born dead to God.

verse 13
Since there was not yet any law, men were not held responsible for Adam's sin, they were not imputed with Adam's sin, but they were still born separated from God and considered sinners by Him.
Romans 1:19-20 explain this well.

verse 14
That which is know about God is evident from creation. Even though there was no law, man could still see the divine power of God, if he wanted to, and so salvation was available even then for those who believed in a God they might not have even known by name.
So though there was no law (the decalogue) to break, man still was affected by sin, due to Adam's sin. But he did not commit the first sin, Adam did. They did not disobey any SPECIFIC command of God, but were born sinners anyway. This is called the sin nature. An effect of O.S.

Since all mankind is now born with the sin nature, we are born sinners.
Verse 13 cleary states that sin is not imputed.
The effect of Adam's sin, the sin nature, is imputed to us.

Click to expand...

You say you don't make up doctrine...so we will see.

Indeed, concerning (Rom. 5:12) Due to Adams sin we are dead to God. Just like those from Adam to Moses. Who were not dead due to their own sins, they were dead due to Adams sin.

Your interpretation of (5:13) is flawed. Men were not charged with 'their' sin because they were not under law. Adams sin is not in view in (5:13). And (Rom. 1:19-20) does nothing to explain your view.

The point of (Rom. 5:14) is that men did not die due to their own sins. They died due to Adams sin. They became guilty of Adams sin. Else they wouldn't have died.

No, (Rom. 5:13) clearly states that sin is not imputed 'where there is no law'. Not that sin is not imputed. The sin of Adam is imputed to the human race. Which means though there is no law from Adam to Moses, all died because Adams sin was imputed to them.

Adams sin is imputed to us.

Stranger

Stranger said:

You say you don't make up doctrine...so we will see.

Indeed, concerning (Rom. 5:12) Due to Adams sin we are dead to God. Just like those from Adam to Moses. Who were not dead due to their own sins, they were dead due to Adams sin.

You interpretation of (5:13) is flawed. Men were not charged with 'their' sin because they were not under law. Adams sin is not in view in (5:13). And (Rom. 1:19-20) does nothing to explain your view.

The point of (Rom. 5:14) is that men did not die due to their own sins. They died due to Adams sin. They became guilty of Adams sin. Else they wouldn't have died.

No, (Rom. 5:13) clearly states that sin is not imputed 'where there is no law'. Not that sin is not imputed. The sin of Adam is imputed to the human race. Which means though there is no law from Adam to Moses, all died because Adams sin was imputed to them.

Adams sin is imputed to us.

Stranger

Click to expand...

Ok
Let me ask you this...
If Adam's sin IS imputed to everyone, as you believe,
then every baby is born with a sin and since babies cannot ask forgiveness does this mean they're lost
if they die?

Stranger said:

Adams sin is imputed to us.

Click to expand...

Good post...I would only change just one word...
your quote:- adams sin is imputed to us. (the general mass of 'us' ?)
Yet for blood washed Christians "Adam's sin WAS imputed to us" agree?
Righteousness is now imputed via the last Adam.

1 Cor 15 "As in Adam all died, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."
Just as Abrahams faith was imputed to him as righteousness , so is our faith imputed as righteousness. .
At this moment the great unwashed are still under the "shall"...but for the Christian we are as Abraham , righteous by faith. Do we see this the same?

GodsGrace said:

Ok
Let me ask you this...
If Adam's sin IS imputed to everyone, as you believe,
then every baby is born with a sin and since babies cannot ask forgiveness does this mean they're lost
if they die?

Click to expand...

Yes, every baby born is born a sinner and is separated from God at birth. As to a newborn's destination if it dies, that is a question many have wrestled with. The age of accountability is one way. And it does have some Scriptural support.

I have a different view, though I am not going to the martyrs stake over it. You and I must recognize we see things differently than God. God sees the whole thing. When a baby is born, you and I see a sweet innocent child. But, God knows every baby that is born. He knows who the baby is and what he will be. When Judas was born, he was a sweet cuddly child. But God knew who he was. And he was not of God. So, had he died as a baby, he would have died separated from God. It doesn't matter that he was a baby. It mattered who he was and who he was of.

Stranger

"ByGrace" said:

Good post...I would only change just one word...
your quote:- adams sin is imputed to us. (the general mass of 'us' ?)
Yet for blood washed Christians "Adam's sin WAS imputed to us" agree?
Righteousness is now imputed via the last Adam.

1 Cor 15 "As in Adam all died, even so in Christ shall all be made alive."
Just as Abrahams faith was imputed to him as righteousness , so is our faith imputed as righteousness. .
At this moment the great unwashed are still under the "shall"...but for the Christian we are as Abraham , righteous by faith. Do we see this the same?

Click to expand...

When I said 'us', I meant the whole human race. Adams sin is imputed to the whole human race, Adams race.

The righteousness of Christ is imputed to all of those in Christ, by faith, which make up the race of the Last Adam. And that is us believers. (1Cor: 45-47)

It is a wonderful truth. Many find fault with God in attributing Adams sin to us when we didn't do it. But because God made all guilty in one man, He can also redeem all in One Man, Jesus Christ, through His work, though we didn't do it either. Adams sin was not mine really, but it becomes mine due to imputation. The righteousness of Christ is not mine really, but it also becomes mine due to imputation.

Yes, I believe we agree.

Stranger

Stranger said:

Yes, every baby born is born a sinner and is separated from God at birth. As to a newborn's destination if it dies, that is a question many have wrestled with. The age of accountability is one way. And it does have some Scriptural support.

Click to expand...

A baby is not at the age of accountability.i

I have a different view, though I am not going to the martyrs stake over it. You and I must recognize we see things differently than God. God sees the whole thing. When a baby is born, you and I see a sweet innocent child. But, God knows every baby that is born. He knows who the baby is and what he will be. When Judas was born, he was a sweet cuddly child. But God knew who he was. And he was not of God. So, had he died as a baby, he would have died separated from God. It doesn't matter that he was a baby. It mattered who he was and who he was of.

Stranger

Click to expand...

I said before these last posts that you hold a valid POV and I wasn't willing to debate it in any way.

Adam's sin has been passed on to all mankind.
We suffer from this by being born with the sin nature.
Thus we suffer from the sin of Adam, and it has been passed but we are not responsible for it personally. Although we all pay for it since Adam was the "head" of man and represented man and thus all mankind is held responsible for his sin, but we did NOT cause the first sin.

"original sin is the corruption of the nature of every man. Whereby man is in his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth contrary to the spirit."
John Wesley, Works volume V

"Confess this need to God [for the spirit filled life]. You are not responsible for having inherited this plague of moral infection [O.S.]
but you are responsible to avail yourself of God's cleansing cure."
Dynamics of Discipling
Original Sin is the Basis for Moral Conflict from Within
page 121

Stranger said:

And that is us believers.

Click to expand...

always "us" believers, huh? Which don't get me wrong, i still fall back into this even today, but assumptions that are likely unfounded are being made in this, there is a pride inherent in the statement that makes its own statement, however you want to put it.

Not saying it isn't true, either--but that i can just hear Hitler saying "us believers" in the same voice.

"ByGrace" said:

. ? . come again?

Click to expand...

lol. If there is an "us," then there is by definition a "them," right. And it follows that these can be defined, or rather that they have been defined, not that they can or even should be. Iow the Good Samaritan would not be included in this "us," see, and if you started trying to "help" the GS "unto salvation" or whatever he would not be interested in your help, nor in our definition of him as "one of them." The GS would likely run the other direction from anyone declaring themselves a..."priest," or a believer, iow

Iow "us" and "we" is a self-serving perception, that allows one to include themselves in a group, a defined group, "the saved" or whatever, a matter of pride, "We'uns what love Jesus," the inference being that if you do not agree with "us," you cannot be right. I know it seems like a small thing, and it is, from a pov, but it is also a very telling statement, it insists upon one perception as being the correct one, even though an assumption is obviously being made.

Humility acknowledges the assumption, in a way that pride does not. And i don't mean this to apply to anyone specifically, Stranger is just bearing the brunt of this undeservedly as the example lol, it is something that everyone does, me included.

Do you know that you are saved, or do you have "the hope of salvation?"

seems like a small thing, but it split the Anabaptist church

bbyrd009 said:

Do you know that you are saved, or do you have "the hope of salvation?"
seems like a small thing, but it split the Anabaptist church

Click to expand...

Can't speak for anyone else...but I know. Only because the bible says so.
So I believe it. Here we have Faith back in the picture again.
1 John...( not Paul, so you can take John's word to the bank lol)
1 John 5:13 "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God."
I was a very young Christian, and a dear mentor told me I would be tested just like Eve... "hath God said..?" I believed then and have never ever had a single doubt..faith is a wonderful thing.

GodsGrace said:

You seem pretty darn intelligene RO

What kind of a question is that???

With whom was the Adamic Covenant made...
With Adam or with Eve?

Thus, who is responsible?

Click to expand...

So by that reasoning, none of us are actually responsible. Only the one with whom the covenant was made would be the responsible party. Thus, Abraham must be the responsible party for those of "faith".

Adam was there with her.

Richard_oti said:

So by that reasoning, none of us are actually responsible. Only the one with whom the covenant was made would be the responsible party. Thus, Abraham must be the responsible party for those of "faith".

Adam was there with her.

Click to expand...

God made the covenant with Adam.
We're discussing the Edenic Covenant, not Abraham.
Also, i dont go by my own reasoning,,,I learned.

See Hosea 6:7 Who broke the covenant?

Also, this will be confirmed in
Romans 5:12,14
1 Corinthians 15:20-22
1 Corinthians 15:22

God made the covenant with Adam...
Genesis 2:15-17

When were the eyes of Adam and Eve opened?
After she ate, or after Adam ate?
Genesis 3:6-7

Who did God call in the Garden?
Genesis 3:9

GodsGrace said:

<snip>
When were the eyes of Adam and Eve opened?
After she ate, or after Adam ate?
Genesis 3:6-7

Click to expand...

Did it require for Adam to partake in order for her eyes to be opened?

"ByGrace" said:

Can't speak for anyone else...but I know. Only because the bible says so.

Click to expand...

well, the Bible says both!

"ByGrace" said:

So I believe it. Here we have Faith back in the picture again.

Click to expand...

and perceptions, yes. But what is your perception at "hope of salvation?"

...so that we might be justified by His grace, and become heirs in hope of eternal life. Titus 3:7

But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 1Thess5:8

Richard_oti said:

Did it require for Adam to partake in order for her eyes to be opened?

Click to expand...

What I learned is that, Yes, it took Adam to take the forbidden fruit in order for their eyes to be opened. This is confirmed in
Genesis 3:7

After Adam ate, their eyes were opened.
I learned that if Adam had scolded her and had not eaten, the fall never would have occurred because of Eve not knowing about the covenant.
She seemed very innocent in the Genesis story trusting only in how the fruit looked to the eye, being pleasant and good for food.

Adam made the mistake of eating when Eve offered the fruit to him.
Or, we could say that Eve made a mistake, but Adam caused the fall.