Romans 5:12-19 and the source of sin and death in humanity

I have proven we are sinful (not sinners) in nature before we sin - no response by you to those posts yet.

We are born spiritually dead! Are saying Adam was created spiritually dead? Are you saying there was not at least mutable spiritual union between God and Adam? Are you saying his sin did not produce "death" in the sense of spiritual separation?

Please respond to the evidences provided in posts 135, 141 and 143 that proves mans human nature with regard to its moral apsect was changed due to sin and now he has a depraved moral nature.

 

No, it is not a grammatical error. Note that he says "I SAID" ! What is he referring to? Verse 44 is what he is referring to and repeats it immediately in verse 65 after saying "Because I said." The "because" has reference to verse 44 and what he repeats is verse 44 exept he changed one word. He changes "draw" for "given." Are you following me? Why did he say what he said in verse 44? He said it because unbelieving man CANNOT COME to Him unless the Father does something found in the words "draw" and "given." What is that? It is what is necessary to change "cannot" to "can"! As they are in unbelief they CANNOT come to Christ in faith because the lack ABILITY to believe or come to Christ. So, what the Father does is change that INABILITY to come to ABILITY to come.

Why is he repeating what he said in verse 44? Because he is explaining why they continued in unbelieve BECAUSE the Father did not give the ABILITY to overcome the CANNOT or inability to come to Christ in faith.

It should be obvious your theory is wrong because Jesus plainly says that unbelief in man is something he is not able to overcome EXCEPT by divine intervening by the action of drawing/giving. But your theory says man is able to come to him and nothing prevents him and you cite Deut 30 to help prove your point.

 

I didn't address it because it does not teach that unbelieving man has natural ability to believe in Christ. They have natural ability to believe in many other things but not in Christ as Jesus flatly denies unregenerate man "can come to me" without divine intervention.

In Deuteronomy he is addressing the nation a mixture of lost and saved. And he is not referring to personal faith in Christ as their Messiah but to the Law covenant established by Moses.

 

That is totally irrational as he is referencing what he "said' in verse 44 where he denies any unbeleiver is able to come to him in faith EXCEPT by divine intervention (draw/give). So, unbelief is Not the problem but INABILITY to come to Christ in belief is the problem. So, in verse 65 he simply repeats what he said in verse 44 providing the reason why those in verse 44 ARE STILL IN UNBELIEF. The Father never "gave" that ability to them to overcome unbelief.

Your theory denies the very need of the EXCEPTION CLAUSE.

 

In summary, the moral nature of Adam did in fact change at the point he sinned BECAUSE "death" became part of his moral nature as that is exactly what "spiritual separation" is! Spiritual separation is being "without God" and thus without LIFE, LIGHT, LOVE and HOLINESS and these involve moral qualities that transform his moral nature from "upright" to sinful.

In order to escape my conclusions one must refuse to define "death" as spiritual separation from God.

In order to escape my conclusions one must refuse to define "spiritual separation" as inclusive of separation from LIFE, LOVE, LIGHT and HOLINESS of God.

In order to escape my conclusion one must refuse to define the unregenerate state as a STATE OR CONDITION of the human moral nature as DEAD, DARK, DEPRAVED AND UNHOLY.

In order to escape my conclusion one must refuse to accept Paul's characterization of the unregenerated CONDITION/STATE as described in Ephesians 4:18-19 and other similar scriptures.

IN ORDER TO DISPROVE ANY OF THE ABOVE ONE MUST PROVIDE PROOF/EVIDENCE THAT MY EVIDENCE FOR THIS IN POSTS #135; 141 AND 143 IS ERRONEOUS - GOOD LUCK!

 

This is all true! But has absolutely nothing to do with this debate on this thread as my position does not deny anything listed above.

 

If you will examine Posts #135, 141 and 143 you will find my answers but in addition a defense for my answers concerning the fallen moral nature of man present at birth of all post-Adamic humans

 

Brother, you response is simply irrational and completely eisgetical in nature.

First, there is no need for interpretation to his words as they are plainly stated, "no man" does not mean some men and not others. "can come" does not mean they can come. "except the father draw" denies plainly that unbelievers have ability to come to Christ by faith. Nothing hard here, nothing unclear, no hidden meanings.

If you can't follow that, then look at the prophets he cites in verse 45 and read what they say (Isa. 54:13 and Jer. 31:33-34) and you will plainly see that "draw" means the internal instruction in God's new covenant people that brings "all" without exception to faith.

In Verse 64 you are given an example of unbelievers who did not come to Christ in faith and Jesus simply reminds his audience the reason for their unbelief "from the beginning" is because they cannot come to Christ in faith unless IT (ability) is given unto them.

Can't make it any clearer brother! Your interpretation denies the very scriptures Jesus cites to explain what he means by "draw" and whom God draws. I know you don't like it but I did not write it or cite those Scriptuers - Jesus did.

 

Just one question. Do you believe all men can come to Christ without any divine intervention? Jesus said plainly "NO man CAN come to me" except by a specific type of divine intervention - but your understanding and interpretation of Deuteronomy 30 and Romans 10 repudiate the words of Christ on the very subject we are discussing.

Your understanding of Romans 10 is to the exclusion of Romans 9 and 11 which contradict your interpretation. Responsibility is not the same as ability. God is not culpable for human inability as that is man's fault not God's. If you want to get into Romans 10 and see how your understanding holds up to proper exegesis then I am your man and we can do so in thread dedicated to that subject.

 

First, you stop short in the text in Romans 10 where Paul deals with the origin of faith. Verses 17-18 deal with the origin of faith in man. Take a look at the Greek word translated "word" in verses 17 and 18. The heart that believeth is not the unregerate heart but the heart that undergoes the creation of faith within by divine fiat as described by Paul in 2 Cor. 4:6 and 1 Thes. 1:4-5. The Greek term translated "word" is Rhema and may mean "word of command" and faith comes by God's word of command as described in 2 Cor.4:6 but not by man's word of command as in Rom. 10:18.

This word of command is compared to God's speaking light into existence in Genesis 1:3 and constitutes what Jesus means by the word "draw" and "given" in John 6:44, 65.