SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Does Man Have A Sinful Nature?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 Next Page )
PosterThread
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4499


 Re:

Hi TheArminian...

Quote:

TheArminian wrote:
A fool judges a matter before he hears it the Bible says.
....
What I liked the most about this article is how every point was supported with Scriptures.


If possible could you answer this. Did [u]you[/u] write the article in the first post of this thread?

If so, I find it highly suspect (and dishonest) if you created an identity to simply congratulate your own views. If I am incorrect, I apologize. Regardless of whatever is right or wrong with Jesse Morrell's views, it just seems somewhat interesting that you tend to respond to this particular man's views almost exclusively.

Again, I apologize if this question seems just a little overbearing. I don't mean to embarrass you or even accuse you of hiding an ulterior identity (or motive behind your posts). Yet, it would help me understand your posts just a little more if I knew whether you are actually Jesse (or someone related to him in any way) when you write these sort of favorable critiques that applaud his articles.

Thanks.


_________________
Christopher

 2009/12/9 16:53Profile
twayneb
Member



Joined: 2009/4/5
Posts: 2002
Joplin, Missouri

 Re:

Quote:
What I liked the most about this article is how every point was supported with Scriptures.



In a court of law, an attorney will have a predetermined side of the case to argue, and will go out seeking facts to support their case. Unfortunately, many do the same with the Word of God. Every one of us is susceptible to hearing a doctrine that just "sounds good" to us or finding a teacher who we really like. We develop a loyalty to the doctrine or to the teacher, and from that point forward seek scriptural "evidence" to support our doctrine. Sometimes these "arguments" with all of their scriptural twists, turns, and complexities can assume monumental proportions.

This is not how one should approach scripture. The Word of God is alive, it is powerful, and it is meant to produce fruit in our lives. The word reveals to us who God is. The term doctrine simply means, "What the Bible teaches." But doctrine is not the end, and propping up doctrine with argument or support is not where it is at. Having God reveal to us the truth of His word, and allowing that word to produce in us His fruit is the point of all study of scripture.

How often have I been convinced of a doctrinal stand, and had scripture lined up on my side, only to find that there were other scriptures that blew my little theory out of the water entirely. Scripture is NEVER self-contradictory. Scripture is always its own best commentary. But, we must study to show ourselves approved, workmen that need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

I am not going to "enter the fray" so to speak on this topic other than to offer a couple of scriptures that seem to me to be a commentary on the topic.

Ephesians 2:1-6

Lets dig into the word, always with the goal that the word transform us (Romans 12:2), and not that we will be better able to defend a position that we feel as though we have come to own.

Blessings Brothers and Sisters

Travis


_________________
Travis

 2009/12/9 17:27Profile
nasekom
Member



Joined: 2009/5/29
Posts: 146
Dublin,Ireland

 Re: Does Man Have A Sinful Nature?

of course man has a sinful nature.

"For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord!" Rom.7:22-25.

Praise be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord for His victory!


_________________
Yuri

 2009/12/9 17:28Profile









 Re:

Here are some passages against the idea of a sinful nature:

Rom. 1:26-27

Rom. 2:14-15

Ps. 139:14

Ecclesiastes 7:29

Eze. 18:20

Luke 24:39

John 1:14

1 Tim. 3:16

1 Jn. 4:3

2 Jn. 1:7

Heb. 2:14, 16-17

1 Jn. 4:3

2 Jn. 1:7

Rom. 6:13

Rom. 6:19

Rom. 12:1

1 Thes. 4:3-4

1 Thes. 5:23

Quote:
"For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.



Isn't that taking about the part of our nature that demands virtue (conscience) and the part of our nature that demands gratification and indulgence (flesh)?

This is from the article:

While it is true that our natural tendency is for virtue as far as our conscience is concerned, but our natural tendency is for self-gratification, as far as our flesh is concerned. Our flesh doesn’t care if we gratify it naturally or unnaturally, lawfully or unlawfully, it just wants to be gratified. The reason many think that we have a “natural tendency towards sin” is because they are thinking of our flesh, but our flesh doesn’t want “sin” as if “sin” was the end in mind or object sought. The flesh wants gratification, whether it comes through sin or through lawful means. The flesh that God gives us when He forms us in the womb can be gratified lawfully or unlawfully.


Quote:
Ephesians 2:1-6



This is from the article:

When the Bible talks about the natural man (1 Cor. 2:14) it is talking about a sensual and carnal man. It is someone who chooses to be governed by their passions rather than being governed by their conscience. When the Bible says that sinners are “by nature children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3) it is talking about those who live for the gratification of their flesh. The context of men being under God’s wrath by nature is talking about a former manner of life, addressing a previous lifestyle. "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world... among whom also all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh..." (Eph. 2:2-3) Instead of obeying their conscience, living for God, and putting their flesh in its proper place (a spiritual life), they ignore their conscience and live for themselves by living for the gratification of their flesh (a carnal life). This is a natural life as opposed to a spiritual life. Living a natural or carnal life is selfishly living for the gratification of your flesh.

 2009/12/9 17:53
roaringlamb
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 1519
Santa Cruz California

 Re:

Quote:
Did you write the article in the first post of this thread?



Please answer the question Jesse and please don't bring in your other names(truefaithsav, georgefox, and I think there was another, but I don't recall it) to build up support for your views.

Thank you


_________________
patrick heaviside

 2009/12/9 18:04Profile
Leo_Grace
Member



Joined: 2009/6/14
Posts: 703


 Re: Does Man Have A Sinful Nature?

Quote:
by TheArminian on 2009/12/9 12:19:37

http://kmeministries.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=549&Itemid=68

I thought that this was a pretty good article:
DOES MAN HAVE A SINFUL NATURE?

Jesse Morrell



In answer to the title question, I am definitely sure that man has a sinful nature. To prove this, all I need do is quote the author of the article himself, Jesse Morrell, who said:

"I would sooner become an atheist than to become a Calvinist."

and

"I do this for a living."

So here we have a man, Jesse Morrell, who loves his own doctrines more than he loves God. He also does his ministry work not out of love for God, as one would expect, but to make a living.

He clearly is not obeying the greatest commandment of all:

Mt 22:37-38 Jesus replied: [color=CC3300]“ ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment."[/color]

CASE CLOSED.

 2009/12/9 19:02Profile
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re: Does Man Have A Sinful Nature?

Quote:

TheArminian wrote:

God also designed our constitution or nature with a conscience so that we have the natural tendency or constitutional bent to obey the law of God.



Hosea 11:7 And my people are bent to backsliding from me: though they called them to the most High, none at all would exalt him.

God in his good book says the opposite of what your teacher Jesse says. When he says "my people" he is talking about believers in him. If believers in him have a "bent" to turn away from God. What are we before we become believers.

Roms 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned

Adam created in the image of God, lost that original image upon sin and became depraved and sinful by nature. Then, just as God transmitted His image to Adam, Adam transmitted his image to his offspring. This unfortunately was a depraved image, spiritually dead and subject to physical death. It was a sinful-nature we are born with that gave us a bent towards sin.

Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

The "old man" mentioned here is that Adamic nature we inherited from Adam. Jesus the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world came not only to deal with the sin we commited but also the sin we inherited from Adam.

We who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ have to be crucified with him so that our body of sin our old man might be put to death.

Why because he who is dead is free from sin Rom 6:7.

After reading what you posted from Jesse it makes me think that this teaching is in fact doing away with the need for a saviour. That men are good and with the right upbringing and teaching then everything would be okay.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Our sin has separated us from a Holy God, and there is no amount of good-doing that could correct the penalty of our sinful actions and depraved nature.

Anyone that would claim that their right standing with God is based upon their goodness is deceived, and has not the grace of God. Everywhere the Scriptures proclaim that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God"
The conviction and admission of sinful failure is essential for faith to be saving faith. The barrier is sin.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2009/12/9 19:04Profile









 Re:

Quote:
Hosea 11:7 And my people are bent to backsliding from me: though they called them to the most High, none at all would exalt him.

God in his good book says the opposite of what your teacher Jesse says. When he says "my people" he is talking about believers in him.



This verse is talking about Israelites. It is not saying that believers have a sinful nature or that Christians have a bent to disobey God. The green word here for "bent" means habituate.

The article said:

Some today may think that sin is natural because they have developed a habit of sinning. Choice creates character and character creates habits. Through the continual choice of disobedience men have made sin “natural” or “normal” for them, in the sense that it has become their habit. This habit of sin, or tendency towards unlawful gratification, is the result of their own will and not the product of the hands of God. Their habit comes, not from their nature, but from their will.



Quote:
Adam created in the image of God, lost that original image upon sin and became depraved and sinful by nature.



Wrong wrong wrong. The Bible says, after the fall of Adam, that mankind is in the image of God. (Gen. 1:26-27; Gen. 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7). The Bible says that men are “made after the similitude of God” (Jas. 3:9).

Quote:
It was a sinful-nature we are born with that gave us a bent towards sin.



It is the conscience that God has given us that gives us a bent against sin and towards obedience.

Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

The "old man" mentioned here is that Adamic nature we inherited from Adam.


No no no. The old man is the former selfish person that we used to be. "man" does not mean "nature". The old man was the previous person that we were - a self centered, wicked, selfish person. Christians have put off their sins, they are new men.

Quote:
sin we inherited from Adam.



Sin is a free will choice, not a hereditary substance.

"Go and sin no more" implies that all sin is an avoidable choice.


Quote:
After reading what you posted from Jesse it makes me think that this teaching is in fact doing away with the need for a saviour.



Actually the opposite is true.

If a man is born sinful, it is not his fault.
If it is not his fault, he doesn't deserve punishment.
If he doesn't deserve punishment, he doesn't need a Savior.
Therefore if man is involuntarily sinful, he doesn't need Jesus.

But if men have chosen to be sinners, despite their God given nature, then they truly deserve punishment and truly need a Savior.


Quote:
Our sin has separated us from a Holy God, and there is no amount of good-doing that could correct the penalty of our sinful actions and depraved nature.

Anyone that would claim that their right standing with God is based upon their goodness is deceived, and has not the grace of God.



Mankind has been given a free will from God and a good nature from God. Yet despite all of that, we have sinned and therefore deserve eternal hell. The only way that our penalty of eternal hell can be remitted by God's grace and mercy is through the atonement of Christ. Christ's atonement substitutes our penalty so that God will turn from His wrath if we turn from our sins.

Though we are naturally capable of obeying God, no amount of obedience can ever atone for even one act of disobedience. Only blood shed can atone for sin. Therefore man's natural ability to obey, and man's conscience (bent towards obedience) does not negate our necessity for the atonement. In fact the whole reason we need the atonement is because we have used our natural ability of choice to sin and we know better because God has given us a conscience (which gives us a bent towards obedience). Free will and conscience are the conditions of our accountability and consequently our need of a Savior.

Quote:
Everywhere the Scriptures proclaim that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God"
The conviction and admission of sinful failure is essential for faith to be saving faith. The barrier is sin.



This is from the article:

It should be understood that a man is not virtuous because he feels bad for doing wrong. Even the unconverted naturally feel bad for doing wrong. That is a natural reaction that the sensibilities have in response to the consciousness of the choices of the will and the moral knowledge of the mind. Our feelings naturally react when our will chooses to obey or disobey our conscience. Moral character is not determined by the states of the sensibilities but by the states of the will. A man is virtuous if he actually chooses what is virtuous. A man is not virtuous because he has a natural tendency towards virtue. His will is free to live according to his nature or to choose that which is against nature. Man’s character is derived from his will choosing according to, or contrary to, the conscience God created as part of his nature.

We must not confuse character with constitution. Nature and character must be distinguished between, lest we confuse our natural attributes with our moral attributes. Character is determined by our own will. Our constitution or nature is determined by God’s will. Moral character relates to voluntary states, not involuntary states. There is no moral character in man’s involuntary nature. Man did not consent to or choose what type of nature or natural tendencies he would have. Therefore his moral character does not consist in his nature or natural tendencies. Man’s natural tendency does not show any virtue in the transgressor, rather, it shows the goodness of our Designer. God has given us our nature and therefore our nature reveals the character of God. God has so constituted man that we naturally know right from wrong, we naturally approve of the right and disapprove of the wrong, and naturally feel good when we do right and naturally feel bad when we do wrong. In this way God has created us with a natural tendency towards virtue.

Some may think that if I am saying that mankind has a natural tendency towards virtue that mankind is not sinful. The truth is that a man is a sinner, who truly deserves punishment and therefore needs forgiveness through the atonement of Christ, because while God has given mankind the natural ability to obey Him, and He has given us the natural tendency to obey Him, we have nevertheless chosen to sin. Despite all the efforts of God, both internal and external to man, mankind has still chosen to rebel against the good moral government of God. All men everywhere have personally and freely chosen to be sinners (Gen. 6:12, Ex. 32:7, Deut. 9:12, Deut. 32:5, Jdg. 2:19, Hos. 9:9, Ps. 14:2-3, Isa. 53:6, Ecc. 7:29, Rom. 3:23, Rom. 5:12.) despite our natural tendency towards virtue and our natural ability to do the will of God. “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned everyone to his own way...” (Isa. 53:6). “Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.” (Ecc. 7:29). We have used our natural ability of choice to choose contrary to the design of our nature. All men have deliberately chosen what they have naturally known is wrong. Sinners have abused their constitution and misused their nature. Man, not God, is at blame for sin because sin is the result of free will, not the result of a sinful nature.

Gordon C. Olson said, “Moral beings themselves are the author of their own rebellion, which is an unintelligent abuse of their God-given endowments of personality…. It is man who has abused his God-given freedom.”5 Paris Reidhead said, “Are people in trouble spiritually because they inherit some spiritual defect from their parents or grandparents? No. They are in trouble because when they reach the age of accountability they deliberately turn their own way - they commit their will to the principle and practice of pleasing themselves as the end of their being. That is sin.”6 He also said, "Now remember, sin is a crime. It is the committal of the will to the principle and practice of governing one's life to please one's self. In other words, when the Scripture says, 'all have sinned,' it is saying that upon reaching the age of accountability, every individual has chosen to govern and control his life to please himself... We know that upon reaching the age of accountability, each of us chose as the principle by which we would live: 'I am going to govern and control my own life."7



 2009/12/9 20:33
Christinyou
Member



Joined: 2005/11/2
Posts: 3699
Ca.

 Re:

Try this article on for size, the other one does not fit.

Gaebelein's Annoted Bible
Romans 5:12




4. In Christ.
The Sanctification of the Believer;
his Deliverance from Sin and the Law;
Children and Heirs.
Chapter 5:12-8.

CHAPTER 5:12-21

1. Sin and Death Through the First Adam. 12-14.
2. In Adam by Nature; in Christ Through Grace. 15-21.
So far the subject of this Epistle has been our sins and how God has dealt with them in the Cross of Christ. The guilt and penalty of the sins of the believer are forever gone. With this section the question of sin itself is taken up and we learn how the justified believer is also sanctified in Christ and as such delivered from the dominion of sin and from the law. Furthermore we learn it also includes that believers are children and heirs of God. To distinguish between sins and sin is important. Sin is that evil principle in us, as fallen creatures, and sins are the fruits which spring from the evil root in us. Sin, the old nature, and how God deals with it in virtue of the redemption of Jesus Christ, is now, first of all, revealed. What we were in Adam and what we are through grace in Christ, how as identified with Christ we may be delivered from the power of indwelling sin, are truths unknown to many believers. Without this knowledge a true Christian experience, such which a believer should constantly enjoy, is impossible. One of the chief reasons why true believers are carried about with divers and strange doctrines, is the ignorance of these great facts of our redemption in Christ as unfolded in this part of Romans. How many others are constantly striving and struggling to lead a spiritual life and fail in it because they know not the great principles of sanctification and deliverance in Christ.

Verses 12-14.--"Wherefore as by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death and thus death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." By one man, the first Adam, sin entered into the world (not sins, but sin). And death followed, which is physical death. "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return," and this death has passed upon the race because of sin. The margin of the authorized version contains a statement which is responsible for a very unscriptural teaching. The margin states "in whom all have sinned"; upon this it has been taught that the guilt of Adam has been imputed to all. This is not correct. We are not responsible for the sin of Adam nor are we held responsible by God for a sinful nature; we are responsible for the outworking of that nature, that is for our own sins. The wicked dead, those whose sins were not taken away, because they believed not, will not be judged for having had a sinful nature, but solely according to their works (Re 20:12). Death comes upon us on account of our sins, as it is stated in this verse "death passed upon all men for that all have sinned.

"For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law; nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of Him to come." This looks difficult, but it is simple after all. The law was given by Moses; from Adam to Moses there was no law, men were left to conscience, by which they knew good and evil. But death reigned nevertheless from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression. Adam had a commandment which he transgressed, inasmuch as there was no law till Moses, the generations could not sin after the similitude of Adam's transgression. Sin is lawlessness and not as the faulty translation of 1Jo 3:4 states, "sin is the transgression of the law." However, sin becomes transgression when there is a law. As there was no law from Adam to Moses, sin was therefore not imputed as transgression. But as they all sinned, death reigned and there is also judgment afterwards for them. The last sentence of verse 14 "who is the figure of Him that was to come" is the important statement which is fully developed in the verses which follow and upon which the whole argument rests.

Verses 15-21.--The first Adam is the type of the last, Adam, the Lord Jesus Christ. The same comparison is also found in 1Co 15 "For as all in Adam die, even so all in Christ shall be made alive" (verse 22,). This passage has often been used by those who teach the ultimate, universal salvation of the whole race. It has nothing whatever to do with salvation from the penalty of sin, but it applies to the resurrection of the bodies of the redeemed. Here in Romans the contrast is of a different nature. Adam and Christ are viewed as two heads, having each his offspring to whom they communicate something. The first Adam bestows upon his offspring the results of his sin; Christ, the last Adam,* bestows upon those who belong to Him, by personal faith in Him, the blessed consequences of His great work. (Christ is never called the second Adam, but the last Adam, as there will not be another after Him.) A sinful nature and physical death is what we have as the children of the first Adam. In Christ the believer receives a sinless nature, eternal life and glory. In this sense Adam is the figure of Him to come.

The first sentence of verses 15 and 16 is best put in the form of a question. This helps much in understanding this deep portion of the Epistle. "But shall not the free gift be as the offence?" By the offence of Adam the many died, his offspring has been affected by his Offence. In like manner the grace of God and the gift of Grace, which is by the other Adam, Jesus Christ abounds also to the many. The question asked must therefore be answered in the affirmative. This and the following verses have also been used to teach that there is universal salvation. But it does not mean that. The condition "faith in Christ" must not be lost sight of. We are all in the first Adam by the natural birth; identification with the second Man is only possible by the new birth and that takes Place when a sinner believes on Christ and in His finished work. Those who do not believe are in Adam and are dead in trespasses and sins. "And shall not as by one that has sinned be the gift? For the judgment was of one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification" (verse 16). The sins committed are here in view. Our sin brought judgment. The free gift of justification, on account of Christ's atoning sacrifice, is blessedly sufficient to deliver from the guilt of many offences. "For if by the offence of one death reigned by the one; much more shall those who receive the abundance of grace, and Of the free gift of righteousness, reign in life by the one, Jesus Christ" (verse 17). The Previous verse spoke of the guilt of sins, which rests upon all those who are in Adam and this guilt is met in Christ by justification. In verse 17 death which reigns in the first man is met by reign of life in Jesus Christ. Those who believe on Him have life now and are delivered from the reign of death. When He comes, the bodies of His Saints will be raised in incorruption and we who remain shall be changed in a moment and be caught up into His Presence without dying. Verse 18 in the Authorized version is poorly translated and misleading. "So then as it was by one offence towards all men to condemnation, so by one righteousness towards all men to justification of life." This blessed contrast between Adam and Christ is made again in verse 19. "For as indeed by the disobedience of the one man (Adam) the many have been constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many shall be constituted righteous." Here it is the contrast between Adam's disobedience and Christ's obedience. And the obedience of Christ which constitutes all who believe on Him righteous, is not His obedient life, but His obedience in the death of the cross. "But law came in in order that the offence might abound; but where sin abounded grace overabounded, in order that, even as sin has reigned in the power of death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Here for the first time a reason is given why God gave the law. The Epistle to the Galatians will bring the subject of Law and Grace more fully to our attention. Law came in that the offence might abound; it has constituted man a transgressor and in this sense the offence abounds. But grace overabounds. It deals with the transgressions and reigns through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Wonderful and preciously deep contrast! In Adam sin. condemnation and death. In Christ righteousness, justification and eternal life; yea much more, eternal glory. In Adam we have his constitution; in Christ we possess through grace His life and glory.

In Christ: Phillip


_________________
Phillip

 2009/12/9 22:42Profile
ccchhhrrriiisss
Member



Joined: 2003/11/23
Posts: 4499


 Re:

Hi again, TheArminian...

Quote:

TheArminian wrote:
A fool judges a matter before he hears it the Bible says.
....
What I liked the most about this article is how every point was supported with Scriptures.


I haven't received a reply to this question yet (unless I missed it). Did [u]you[/u] write the article in the first post of this thread?

Earlier, I wrote this to you:
Quote:

If so, I find it highly suspect (and dishonest) if you created an identity to simply congratulate your own views. If I am incorrect, I apologize. Regardless of whatever is right or wrong with Jesse Morrell's views, it just seems somewhat interesting that you tend to respond to this particular man's views almost exclusively.

Again, I apologize if this question seems just a little overbearing. I don't mean to embarrass you or even accuse you of hiding an ulterior identity (or motive behind your posts). Yet, it would help me understand your posts just a little more if I knew whether you are actually Jesse (or someone related to him in any way) when you write these sort of favorable critiques that applaud his articles. Thanks.



You might wonder what the point would be for my question. You see, honesty matters. If you are actually Jesse, the guy who is credited with writing the article that you posted (and I am not saying that you are), it would seem to be somewhat dishonest to write some of the favorable comments that you have included. It would be something like an author writing a favorable, third-person review of his own book (and of the author himself) but by using a pseudonym. This would be a seemingly sly and deceptive thing to do.

Of course, I don't know if this is even true. You might not be Jesse (and I apologize for the forward nature of the question). However, I have asked this question several times on at least two threads and have not received an answer yet. Previously, I did receive a response about why it would matter. It matters to me because honesty matters. I tend to avoid the words of preachers that I do not trust to be honest men. There have been ministers that I have not followed closely simply because of a glaring character issue like that. So please forgive me if this seems like an accusation.

Now, if this is Jesse: I would say that I would have a problem if you are operating under a pseudonym (or series of pseudonyms) and then speaking about yourself or your articles/views through a separate personality. It isn't helpful to your cause to pretend to be someone else simply to bring up your views and by telling yourself (through various identities) that your articles/teachings/views are admired.

Again, TheArminian, forgive me if this sounds like an accusation. I wouldn't want to accuse you of something like this. Please understand that honesty matters...even in the little things. Thus, I hope that you can understand my question. It would just help me better understand how I should respond (or not respond) in the future.


_________________
Christopher

 2009/12/9 23:59Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy