In the post "How do you find U.S. women of other religions who want poly", I was asked the following
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Salvation Election/depravity Discussion by KR and DTT
- Thread starter DiscussingTheTopic
- Start date
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
To start I will discuss depravity
people who have not been born-again/born from above/born of the spirit are not totally depraved instead they are increasingly depraved. If you are at 100% depravity today and you are more depraved than yesterday then Yesterday you must have either been less than 100% depraved OR you are 100% of a greater number today than yesterday. [Romans 6:19 suggests people increase in wickedness]
For example
99%*3<100%*3 option 1 increasingly depraved but not totally depraved
100%*3<100%*4 option 2 100% of a greater number
I wish to suggest it is option 1, because option 2 is ridiculous since those who have access to nuclear weapons would have nuked everyone they could , furthermore you could not meet other people without being murdered, 100% of people would try to steal from stores, everyone would be having sex with strangers (they are not married to) and would murder their children, and there would be no more human beings.
I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness.
Romans 6:19 NIV
As of August 25, 2010 the following definitions at dictionary.com
Word Origin & History
depravity
1640s, from deprave + -ity. Earlier in same sense was pravity , from L. pravitas .
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/depravity
Pravity
Prav"i*ty\, n. [L. pravitas, from pravus crooked, perverse.] Deterioration; degeneracy; corruption; especially, moral crookedness; moral perversion; perverseness; depravity; as, the pravity of human nature. "The pravity of the will." --South.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pravity
To start I will discuss depravity
people who have not been born-again/born from above/born of the spirit are not totally depraved instead they are increasingly depraved. If you are at 100% depravity today and you are more depraved than yesterday then Yesterday you must have either been less than 100% depraved OR you are 100% of a greater number today than yesterday. [Romans 6:19 suggests people increase in wickedness]
For example
99%*3<100%*3 option 1 increasingly depraved but not totally depraved
100%*3<100%*4 option 2 100% of a greater number
I wish to suggest it is option 1, because option 2 is ridiculous since those who have access to nuclear weapons would have nuked everyone they could , furthermore you could not meet other people without being murdered, 100% of people would try to steal from stores, everyone would be having sex with strangers (they are not married to) and would murder their children, and there would be no more human beings.
I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness.
Romans 6:19 NIV
As of August 25, 2010 the following definitions at dictionary.com
Word Origin & History
depravity
1640s, from deprave + -ity. Earlier in same sense was pravity , from L. pravitas .
Online Etymology Dictionary, © 2010 Douglas Harper
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/depravity
Pravity
Prav"i*ty\, n. [L. pravitas, from pravus crooked, perverse.] Deterioration; degeneracy; corruption; especially, moral crookedness; moral perversion; perverseness; depravity; as, the pravity of human nature. "The pravity of the will." --South.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pravity
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
Hummmm...DTT, I did not think we needed a whole new thread on this but ok. Hopefully you and I can discuss this here without too many distractions and interruptions. If not maybe we will need to discuss it back in the original thread or move to a pm session or private thread. We'll see.
Your discussion about depravity has in it the idea of some grace. In other words you believe that people are not totally depraved but nevertheless they do have depravity or sin in them that makes them a slave to sin. In Christendom there are three major schools of thought on this. (1) Augustinian/Lutheran/Calvin/Reformed view of Depravity; (2) The Semi-Pelagian (John Cassionite)/Erasmus/Arminian/Wesleyan view of Depravity. And then (3) though few if hardly any would call this truly a Christian option, the Full Pelagian View (man is born innocent, without sin, and totally free, good, and moral).
I'm sure from what you have said herein that you agree that people are as Jesus said: "slaves of sin" (see John 8:34).
So we agree to that much right? We both agree that man is born sinful and is a slave to sin at least in some degree. We may differ on the degree but we agree that a man has enough sin in him to make him captive or bound or caught in a situation that makes him unholy and in need of divine grace for restoration.
If we at least agree to that much then my next question is this.
How do you view foreknowledge. I'll go ahead and give you the three options that I know of. (1) Foreknowledge = inner divine determination of purpose; i.e. God thinks up his own knowledge within himself without learning, looking to see, or having any outer influence to determine his knowledge; (2) Foreknowledge = foresight; God simply knows the future with absolute certainty. (3) Open Theism = God learns and is educated just like we are; he discovers, grows, and develops in his knowledge.
Those are the three main views. There is one more technically called Middle Knowledge or Molinism but it is an offshoot of one of the above so we'll keep it basic for this discussion simply is about marriage options, not about the technicals of this debate.
Alright, so what do you think of foreknowledge? DO you embrace one of those options listed above?
Once we establish where you stand on this then we shall move back to the main point of discussion on marriage options, the goal of my questions originally.
Allen
Hummmm...DTT, I did not think we needed a whole new thread on this but ok. Hopefully you and I can discuss this here without too many distractions and interruptions. If not maybe we will need to discuss it back in the original thread or move to a pm session or private thread. We'll see.
Your discussion about depravity has in it the idea of some grace. In other words you believe that people are not totally depraved but nevertheless they do have depravity or sin in them that makes them a slave to sin. In Christendom there are three major schools of thought on this. (1) Augustinian/Lutheran/Calvin/Reformed view of Depravity; (2) The Semi-Pelagian (John Cassionite)/Erasmus/Arminian/Wesleyan view of Depravity. And then (3) though few if hardly any would call this truly a Christian option, the Full Pelagian View (man is born innocent, without sin, and totally free, good, and moral).
I'm sure from what you have said herein that you agree that people are as Jesus said: "slaves of sin" (see John 8:34).
So we agree to that much right? We both agree that man is born sinful and is a slave to sin at least in some degree. We may differ on the degree but we agree that a man has enough sin in him to make him captive or bound or caught in a situation that makes him unholy and in need of divine grace for restoration.
If we at least agree to that much then my next question is this.
How do you view foreknowledge. I'll go ahead and give you the three options that I know of. (1) Foreknowledge = inner divine determination of purpose; i.e. God thinks up his own knowledge within himself without learning, looking to see, or having any outer influence to determine his knowledge; (2) Foreknowledge = foresight; God simply knows the future with absolute certainty. (3) Open Theism = God learns and is educated just like we are; he discovers, grows, and develops in his knowledge.
Those are the three main views. There is one more technically called Middle Knowledge or Molinism but it is an offshoot of one of the above so we'll keep it basic for this discussion simply is about marriage options, not about the technicals of this debate.
Alright, so what do you think of foreknowledge? DO you embrace one of those options listed above?
Once we establish where you stand on this then we shall move back to the main point of discussion on marriage options, the goal of my questions originally.
Allen
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
If people are born slaves to sin then what would happen to aborted babies when they die?
I suspect that people become slaves to sin after committing their first sin.
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.
John 8:34 NIV
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
If people are born slaves to sin then what would happen to aborted babies when they die?
I suspect that people become slaves to sin after committing their first sin.
Jesus replied, "I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin.
John 8:34 NIV
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
If I understand what you mean, it would be PRIMARILY option 2 and in some special cases possibly a combination of option 1 (for things where choices of things other than the God of Abraham are not involved especially in the initial creation) and possibly 3 (for the flesh incarnation), but throughout all time option 2 is true.
God is all-powerful and powerful enough to be able to give people choices. But God chooses exactly what choices people are given and not given and God foresees what choices people will make. Since God can can limit the number of choices people have he can force anyone to do anything (except perhaps to do something they can not do, etc.) so this does not irreconcilably contradict his all-powerful nature.
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
If I understand what you mean, it would be PRIMARILY option 2 and in some special cases possibly a combination of option 1 (for things where choices of things other than the God of Abraham are not involved especially in the initial creation) and possibly 3 (for the flesh incarnation), but throughout all time option 2 is true.
God is all-powerful and powerful enough to be able to give people choices. But God chooses exactly what choices people are given and not given and God foresees what choices people will make. Since God can can limit the number of choices people have he can force anyone to do anything (except perhaps to do something they can not do, etc.) so this does not irreconcilably contradict his all-powerful nature.
Tlaloc
Member
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
Even if you are advocating full Plegianism it doesn't help you with the heart of the matter does it? Do you agree you won't find a woman of marriageable age outside of Christ that is not a 'slave to sin' ?
I believe Allan's main point is that any woman outside of Christ you find is a slave to sin and subject to extensive depravity. Is that, at least, granted?
That granted I think he can move into presuppositions, which, I believed, is where this topic meets that topic.
Even if you are advocating full Plegianism it doesn't help you with the heart of the matter does it? Do you agree you won't find a woman of marriageable age outside of Christ that is not a 'slave to sin' ?
I believe Allan's main point is that any woman outside of Christ you find is a slave to sin and subject to extensive depravity. Is that, at least, granted?
That granted I think he can move into presuppositions, which, I believed, is where this topic meets that topic.
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
DTT well I've never been much of a dancer so I grant to you that your dancing skills are much greater than mine :lol:
Backing up to the sin question. I'll be more than glad, if you desire, to help you understand the baby issue at another point and time. There is a biblical way, theologically sound, historically validated, and a logically substantiated view that allows all babies to be born in sin yet also for them to still make it safely to heaven through supernatural grace without taking the approach you have taken to get to where you are. The approach you take means that infants make it to heaven because they are innocent (thus implying they need no salvation), which conflicts with Jesus' absolute statement that NO ONE can see the kingdom of God without being born again (John 3:3-16). But as I said that is another subject that you and I can discuss later if you are interested as to how that can be. It is not germane to our subject at this point so let's not get stuck on that point and sidetrack our progress in these other areas.
But for now, to the sin question. There has been at least one other person, and maybe the only scholar at the Ph.D level I have ever heard of, to hold to the idea that one can be born innocent and yet then still fall into sin and slavery. Dr. L. Russ Bush of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (a philosophy professor) held to this type of idea. BUT, he still did say, EVERY person will commit sin so that all of the texts that speak to all of man being in an unrighteous state hold true, lest the Bible contradict itself. In other words, he taught, each person is born in the same sense as Adam but that every single person would naturally do exactly as Adam did, and that would be to sin. According to him, and that view, every person thus from that initial point of sin forward was corrupt, sinful, and a slave to sin as precisely taught in Romans 3:10-18 and in Ephesians 2:1-3 as well as in the many words of Christ. This view simply moves the fall of man to each particular person in that person's current history and time but still affirms without reservation that each and every person shall fall into sin in their early years so as to uphold the universal sinfulness of mankind.
So, to my question: Do you believe that EVERY PERSON WILL choose sin and thus once sin is chosen that the person is sinful, corrupt, and in need of divine grace to be born again and restored back to God?
Or do you think that some person or some persons may in the future, or have ever in the past been, or will be able to remain in that righteous state and therefore never to sin and fall into corruption? In other words, does such a lifelong innocent person exist and if not will there ever be a natural born person who never sins and falls into sin thus making that person without the need of divine supernatural grace?
Or do you simply affirm that early on each person born will sin and thus be sinful and in need of the grace of Christ?
Alright, now moving along to my next question and your answers. Do you understand the foundational rule of logic called the Law of Non-Contradiction. Sometimes it is stated or termed the excluded middle but most of the time it is called the law of non-contradiction. Are you familiar with that and what it means and how it works? I'll pause here with this before venturing into the points you have made about foreknowledge.
Allen
DTT well I've never been much of a dancer so I grant to you that your dancing skills are much greater than mine :lol:
Backing up to the sin question. I'll be more than glad, if you desire, to help you understand the baby issue at another point and time. There is a biblical way, theologically sound, historically validated, and a logically substantiated view that allows all babies to be born in sin yet also for them to still make it safely to heaven through supernatural grace without taking the approach you have taken to get to where you are. The approach you take means that infants make it to heaven because they are innocent (thus implying they need no salvation), which conflicts with Jesus' absolute statement that NO ONE can see the kingdom of God without being born again (John 3:3-16). But as I said that is another subject that you and I can discuss later if you are interested as to how that can be. It is not germane to our subject at this point so let's not get stuck on that point and sidetrack our progress in these other areas.
But for now, to the sin question. There has been at least one other person, and maybe the only scholar at the Ph.D level I have ever heard of, to hold to the idea that one can be born innocent and yet then still fall into sin and slavery. Dr. L. Russ Bush of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary (a philosophy professor) held to this type of idea. BUT, he still did say, EVERY person will commit sin so that all of the texts that speak to all of man being in an unrighteous state hold true, lest the Bible contradict itself. In other words, he taught, each person is born in the same sense as Adam but that every single person would naturally do exactly as Adam did, and that would be to sin. According to him, and that view, every person thus from that initial point of sin forward was corrupt, sinful, and a slave to sin as precisely taught in Romans 3:10-18 and in Ephesians 2:1-3 as well as in the many words of Christ. This view simply moves the fall of man to each particular person in that person's current history and time but still affirms without reservation that each and every person shall fall into sin in their early years so as to uphold the universal sinfulness of mankind.
So, to my question: Do you believe that EVERY PERSON WILL choose sin and thus once sin is chosen that the person is sinful, corrupt, and in need of divine grace to be born again and restored back to God?
Or do you think that some person or some persons may in the future, or have ever in the past been, or will be able to remain in that righteous state and therefore never to sin and fall into corruption? In other words, does such a lifelong innocent person exist and if not will there ever be a natural born person who never sins and falls into sin thus making that person without the need of divine supernatural grace?
Or do you simply affirm that early on each person born will sin and thus be sinful and in need of the grace of Christ?
Alright, now moving along to my next question and your answers. Do you understand the foundational rule of logic called the Law of Non-Contradiction. Sometimes it is stated or termed the excluded middle but most of the time it is called the law of non-contradiction. Are you familiar with that and what it means and how it works? I'll pause here with this before venturing into the points you have made about foreknowledge.
Allen
Hey DTT, just so you know i adjusted the title heading in this thread to "discussion by KR and DTT." This way it may help us keep the thread as a discussion and not something that ventures into some type of a heated debate over the doctrine of election and predestination etc.
Hope you don't mind me doing that....just a safety precaution so we will not get sidetracked.
Chat with ya later.
Hope you don't mind me doing that....just a safety precaution so we will not get sidetracked.
Chat with ya later.
nah....feel free to chat with us on this Tlaloc..........I'm just trying to keep the thread here from diverting into a debate over a subject that I would never debate with anyone via a forum as this.......some subjects are better suited for face to face communication or in a private discussion than all out open debate with ideas and thoughts flying all over the place. Very few things turn out good in those types of shotgun approaches to a such serious subjects with so many emotions and passions connected to it.
I apologize if I sounded like I was trying to keep you from posting in this. As I recall I think you were discussing this in the other area of the thread under the marriage thread. My goal is to get back to the marriage issue once just a few foundations are established and laid.
Like I said, my only goal is not to let this post/forum/thread issue move into a heated argument over election/predestination/etc. Those issues can get hot fast, especially when numerous people or many people begin to chime in from all different angles with different beginning points. Though I certainly have a position on those issues and can make a solid theological case, I would rather not do that herein and create a major rift over a subject that is often enough to choke some who are not used to the topic.
Again, my apologies if I sounded like I trying to push you out. That was not at all my aim.
Your goal seems to be the same as mine to move the subject back towards marriage.
Allen
I apologize if I sounded like I was trying to keep you from posting in this. As I recall I think you were discussing this in the other area of the thread under the marriage thread. My goal is to get back to the marriage issue once just a few foundations are established and laid.
Like I said, my only goal is not to let this post/forum/thread issue move into a heated argument over election/predestination/etc. Those issues can get hot fast, especially when numerous people or many people begin to chime in from all different angles with different beginning points. Though I certainly have a position on those issues and can make a solid theological case, I would rather not do that herein and create a major rift over a subject that is often enough to choke some who are not used to the topic.
Again, my apologies if I sounded like I trying to push you out. That was not at all my aim.
Your goal seems to be the same as mine to move the subject back towards marriage.
Allen
Tlaloc
Member
What you said could sound like one thing or another, but it sounded like neither since I can't hear your voice 
I thought I should ask and be clear, and if you did want a 1 on 1 discussion that would be your prerogative, as 1 on 1 discussions have quite a few advantages over group discussion.
I thought I should ask and be clear, and if you did want a 1 on 1 discussion that would be your prerogative, as 1 on 1 discussions have quite a few advantages over group discussion.Tlaloc said:
Other people can post on this topic.
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
Yes, I agree that I will not find someone of legal marriageable age who is not a slave to sin, unless they have a personal friendship with Jesus Christ.
That being said.... Someone can have a personal friendship with Jesus Christ (without knowing the English word Jesus Christ) who has never read or even seen any of the books of the Bible, and never met any people who call themselves believers in the English Word Jesus Christ.
That being said if someone talks to some demon idol or something that is NOT the same as talking to Jesus.
Tlaloc said:
Yes, I agree that I will not find someone of legal marriageable age who is not a slave to sin, unless they have a personal friendship with Jesus Christ.
That being said.... Someone can have a personal friendship with Jesus Christ (without knowing the English word Jesus Christ) who has never read or even seen any of the books of the Bible, and never met any people who call themselves believers in the English Word Jesus Christ.
That being said if someone talks to some demon idol or something that is NOT the same as talking to Jesus.
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
I do not know the answer
Even if someone never sinned, they would still
1. Be required never to lie or intentionally reject the truth to remain sinless thus when they know the scripture is true they can not deliberately reject it and remain sinless.
2. After reaching a certain age (which may very from individual to individual) they would PROBABLY still need a relationship with Christ to prevent them from committing certain sins, in order to remain sinless. That is there are two ways to be saved from drowning A. Someone can pull you out. B. Someone would help prevent you from falling in.
3. In order to love God with all your heart and soul and mind and strength you must have a relationship with God, at a certain point when the existence of God is clear to them they would be required to have a relationship with Jesus (the God of Abraham) even if they do not call him by that English name, in order to remain sinless.
Thus even if someone was sinless they would need a relationship with God, if they continued to live after a certain point.
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
I do not know the answer
Even if someone never sinned, they would still
1. Be required never to lie or intentionally reject the truth to remain sinless thus when they know the scripture is true they can not deliberately reject it and remain sinless.
2. After reaching a certain age (which may very from individual to individual) they would PROBABLY still need a relationship with Christ to prevent them from committing certain sins, in order to remain sinless. That is there are two ways to be saved from drowning A. Someone can pull you out. B. Someone would help prevent you from falling in.
3. In order to love God with all your heart and soul and mind and strength you must have a relationship with God, at a certain point when the existence of God is clear to them they would be required to have a relationship with Jesus (the God of Abraham) even if they do not call him by that English name, in order to remain sinless.
Thus even if someone was sinless they would need a relationship with God, if they continued to live after a certain point.
Re: Salvation Election/depravity questions by Dr. K.R. Allen
The law of contradiction is that you can not have A and not A, at the same time.
But I have to point out that, it is not as simple as people mistake it for because....
the true and false value of a statement is a function of multiple conditions,
for example what is true in one reference frame may be false in another reference frame, none the less there are correct and incorrect answers for each reference frame thus something can be 100% absolute and 100% relative.
For instance something could be one inch in one reference frame and one half inch in another. If there is a statement the object is one inch when measured so and so a way, it could be true in one reference frame and false in another reference frame, making the law of contradiction not reasonable unless all statements compared refer to the same reference frame.
for another example
You can legally make a right turn on a red light
but you can not legally make a right turn on a red light with a sign that says no right turn on red.
So in order to use the law of contradiction correctly you have to understand what mathematical set things are in and what if then statements are used and what reference frame you are in and how you are measuring something and so on and so forth.
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
The law of contradiction is that you can not have A and not A, at the same time.
But I have to point out that, it is not as simple as people mistake it for because....
the true and false value of a statement is a function of multiple conditions,
for example what is true in one reference frame may be false in another reference frame, none the less there are correct and incorrect answers for each reference frame thus something can be 100% absolute and 100% relative.
For instance something could be one inch in one reference frame and one half inch in another. If there is a statement the object is one inch when measured so and so a way, it could be true in one reference frame and false in another reference frame, making the law of contradiction not reasonable unless all statements compared refer to the same reference frame.
for another example
You can legally make a right turn on a red light
but you can not legally make a right turn on a red light with a sign that says no right turn on red.
So in order to use the law of contradiction correctly you have to understand what mathematical set things are in and what if then statements are used and what reference frame you are in and how you are measuring something and so on and so forth.
Alright, if you do not know the answer then I think that is a fair enough and honest answer. Do you think the Bible will give us that answer? In other words, do you think the Bible, God's love book given to us, is sufficient to give us an answer on the problem of all of humanity? Do you think the Bible will address this problem with clarity?
I'll be glad to walk with you, or to find someone if necessary, to spend time with you in the effort to discover the answer if you are willing to look at it. I think if you do this a light will come on for you.
And this is exactly why I think God has you where you are DTT. There are some foundational truths that I think it is time to back up, or maybe to go forward, to look at. Currently you are in a state of "uncertainty" on what constitutes mankind's problem. As you see it you believe someone could actually be rightly related to God without being redeemed or without the need for Christ, which as you will see if you are willing to look at it, does not fit with the greatest love story book ever known to mankind, the bible. Thus it is hard, very hard, to find love and draw others to love when we too do not understand it as God presents it. Thus uncertainty or clouds exist in the way you view humanity, which practically leads you to believe it is ok to marry an unsaved woman because after all how do we know she is really sinful, maybe she is not, maybe she is still walking with God and thus is ok and thus its ok to marry her. Maybe she believes in Christ even though she does not know Christ. Maybe this, maybe that, maybe all of it, maybe none of it, maybe a mixture of it, who knows just so long as......well....just so long as.....hummmm.....well just as long as I can get a woman then after that everything else can be discovered or worked into place.
That may sound enticing but there is a better way.
It sounds like you are not sure if every single person in this entire world needs to be redeemed by Christ because of their sin. Unless I am misreading it you seem to be saying that it is possible that some can be rightly related to God by simply not falling into sin, thus they are saved not by Christ's bloodshed for their sins but because of them remaining in good standing by their effort to follow God, however that is defined. Is that what I am hearing?
Once you back up and figure out if the Bible teaches everyone needs Christ because everyone is in sin and thus in need of personal redemption, then we can move along to the question of God's knowledge, presuppositions, and how it all fits together in the marriage system. I think this study would do some amazing things for you; plus, I think it might just help you down the road in ways you may not have even imagined. Who knows, maybe the Lord would look upon you with grace and give you your hearts desire if you are faithful in this area of study.
So, let me ask you two questions: (1) have you ever had a friend, a teacher, to help you understand what the bible says about man's sin problem? Kinda like the story in Acts 8:31? Have you ever studied this subject with another person walking with you in the study? I'm talking more than just someone sending you a verse here or a verse there but actually a thorough study of a subject together with someone that cares for you and wants what is best for you? (2) Would you be willing to go through a full study on the doctrine of sin with another person helping you as you go through it examining the majority of texts and ideas that play into the whole subject at hand?
Allen
I'll be glad to walk with you, or to find someone if necessary, to spend time with you in the effort to discover the answer if you are willing to look at it. I think if you do this a light will come on for you.
And this is exactly why I think God has you where you are DTT. There are some foundational truths that I think it is time to back up, or maybe to go forward, to look at. Currently you are in a state of "uncertainty" on what constitutes mankind's problem. As you see it you believe someone could actually be rightly related to God without being redeemed or without the need for Christ, which as you will see if you are willing to look at it, does not fit with the greatest love story book ever known to mankind, the bible. Thus it is hard, very hard, to find love and draw others to love when we too do not understand it as God presents it. Thus uncertainty or clouds exist in the way you view humanity, which practically leads you to believe it is ok to marry an unsaved woman because after all how do we know she is really sinful, maybe she is not, maybe she is still walking with God and thus is ok and thus its ok to marry her. Maybe she believes in Christ even though she does not know Christ. Maybe this, maybe that, maybe all of it, maybe none of it, maybe a mixture of it, who knows just so long as......well....just so long as.....hummmm.....well just as long as I can get a woman then after that everything else can be discovered or worked into place.
That may sound enticing but there is a better way.
It sounds like you are not sure if every single person in this entire world needs to be redeemed by Christ because of their sin. Unless I am misreading it you seem to be saying that it is possible that some can be rightly related to God by simply not falling into sin, thus they are saved not by Christ's bloodshed for their sins but because of them remaining in good standing by their effort to follow God, however that is defined. Is that what I am hearing?
Once you back up and figure out if the Bible teaches everyone needs Christ because everyone is in sin and thus in need of personal redemption, then we can move along to the question of God's knowledge, presuppositions, and how it all fits together in the marriage system. I think this study would do some amazing things for you; plus, I think it might just help you down the road in ways you may not have even imagined. Who knows, maybe the Lord would look upon you with grace and give you your hearts desire if you are faithful in this area of study.
So, let me ask you two questions: (1) have you ever had a friend, a teacher, to help you understand what the bible says about man's sin problem? Kinda like the story in Acts 8:31? Have you ever studied this subject with another person walking with you in the study? I'm talking more than just someone sending you a verse here or a verse there but actually a thorough study of a subject together with someone that cares for you and wants what is best for you? (2) Would you be willing to go through a full study on the doctrine of sin with another person helping you as you go through it examining the majority of texts and ideas that play into the whole subject at hand?
Allen
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
No one can live a sinless life (at least beyond a certain point in time) apart from having a friendship with God, and they would probably have to rely on God, not on themselves to avoid committing sins, so I do not see that as salvation by works.
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
Less than half of people born throughout history are saved so having been taught by someone does not necessarily mean much. I do not know if I had a Bible study focused specifically on the topic of sin before, I certainly have had one's in which sin was mentioned. I would be okay doing such a Bible study, but that does not mean, I would blindly believe whatever you want me to, I would have questions and expect a standard of reason for the claims.
Fair enough.
How about we choose to read together a small portion of Dr. Wayne Grudem's systematic theology regarding his chapter on sin. This chapter is not too long, about 40 or so pages.
We can use that as a guide and discuss any questions you have as we work through it. If you like I can mail you the section copied or if you want you can purchase the work at the book store or online.
What would you prefer?
How about we choose to read together a small portion of Dr. Wayne Grudem's systematic theology regarding his chapter on sin. This chapter is not too long, about 40 or so pages.
We can use that as a guide and discuss any questions you have as we work through it. If you like I can mail you the section copied or if you want you can purchase the work at the book store or online.
What would you prefer?
Dr. K.R. Allen said:
Are these pages available online for free.
By the way does Wayne Gruden believe that people are unable to make choices?
Does Wayne Gruden believe that people are unable to choose if they will be eternally punished by God?
Supposedly he is a Calvinist
August 27, 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wayne_Grudem