[grip_daddy]

I was quoting Ellen White because I used her words to explain what the bible says. It is just like quoting words of Bill Graham or any other scholar, philosopher, or any person whose words cannot be said better.

[grip_daddy]

It is with a great regret that you have quoted a passage from Ellen Whites book as your proof for the Doctrine of Original Sin,

The doctrine of original sin was expounded by Paul in His epistles to Romans, Ephesians, Galatians etc. As said above, quoting any other other does not mean providing extra biblical proof, but using words that you wanted to use which someone with a similar understanding had used.

putting aside the book which you are claim that it is from the Almighty God.

This assertion would be true in circumstances where claimed concepts, dogma, rules, practices, or doctrines cannot find a biblical basis for practising them. For example, there are religious organizations that practice child baptism of which practice can only be traced back to paganism. The said faiths would lay aside the bible and frontier church tradition or norm, or a claimed high ranking individual that enacted such practices. This is different when for example someone will quote my words in attempt to explain a biblical concept, when such a concepts is entirely biblical. To assert otherwise, you will have to prove that the claimed quotations contradict the bible.

Sadly, this gives picture that you are disatissified with the Bible!


On the other hand, giving an individual credit for using her words is an academic practice when the expounded concept is based on common ground and foundation. It is simply a show that the best words I could use to explain to you the concept of Jesus' death had already been written, and the wordings are consistent with biblical truth as provided by Paul, Isaiah, and the four gospel authors.

Atonement, was accepted by the Church three or four centuries after Jesus left the earth.

When do you date the book of Hebrews? This book was written shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem understandably by Paul or one of his close associates. The book of Hebrews primarily deals with atonement in complexity that the church did not get its clear understanding until mid 19th century. The basics of atonement though, as could be understood from other books, was preached by Paul in his epistles.

Deuteronomy 24:16: "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin."
Jeremiah 31:30: "But every one shall die for his own iniquity ..."
Ezekiel 18:20: "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

The verses you have quoted deal with different situations away from atonement. For example Deut simply gives a guiding rule on how to deal with law offenders who would be stoned to death. This is understandably the death of a thief, a murderer, or one who had commited adultery etc.

The other aspect of death is what the bible in Rev 20 calls the second death. This is the eternal separation of man from life, which will be dependent on individual's spiritual status. As the first death (capital punishment), no one will be thrown into the lake of fire because of another person's misdeeds.

Atonement on the other hand means that all of us are supposed to end in this lake of fire, but an option has been provided. This option is in the death of Jesus, who died our death so that if we believe in Him, we may have the eternal life, "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him, should not perish but have everlasting life".

The breaking of the law of God required that man shall die eternally. It is this eternal death that Jesus died but you have to accept that He died for you in order to have it. If you reject it, you still will face this eternal death. In rejecting in therefore, you will equally end up in the lake of fire, but your son, if he accepts it, will gain the everlasting life.

If both of you reject it, each will be in the lake of fire because of individual rejection of Christ, not because who fathered who, or who was whose pastor etc. It is your own sins that will take you to eternal condemnation, but not your relative sins. As said, atonement gives you an option to receive forgiveness of your sins so that you can escape this condemnation.

[Muhammad_4]

Matthew 19:14. "But Jesus said: 'Suffer not little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven."
So everybody is born without sin and all children belong to the kingdom of heaven.
Do you know that it was Paul who abolished the Mosaic law? Read Acts 13:39. "And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."
So why do you believe in the resurrection if Paul himself, who never saw Jesus alive, admitted that this was his gospel? 2 Timothy 2:8. "Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel." So why do you have to believe that he was crucified and raised from the dead?

[grip_daddy]

Matthew 19:14. "But Jesus said: 'Suffer not little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven."

This verse does not in anyway say that children are born without sin. Reading Romans we find that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. This verse simply gives an analogy that children posses some aspect of ignorance and lack of rigidity enabling training to the matters of kingdom of God. It is easier to show a child the right path, than to make Mohamed_4 understand the precious knowledge of God's kingdom. It is easier to convince a child the importance of not drinking, smoking, clubbing, and all these wayward lifestyle, than to convince an adult to stop them. For children, the kingdom of God is open.

So everybody is born without sin and all children belong to the kingdom of heaven.

There is a difference between commiting sin and having a body that is unable to commit sin. At birth, the child has not commited any sin, but the natural tendencies that would be determined by the genetic information in this child make him potent to commit sin. All human beings are naturally inclined to evil, for no one can do right. This natural potency to commit sin is also in itself sinful, which made Paul cry that every time he wanted to do good, there was a law written in his body that inhabited him from achieving this good (see Romans 7
). This naturally written law in our bodies make us prefer evil over good. Envy over generosity, hate over love, war over peace, greed over contentment etc. The human heart is deceitful and evil, and thus no one can be said to be holy, though innocence is debatable.

Do you know that it was Paul who abolished the Mosaic law?

There was no law abolished by any. Read Romans 2, 6, and 7. Some of the laws ended because they were foreshadowing the first coming of Christ, and by His death such laws automatically became obsolete. Other laws were governing Israel as a nation which also became obsolete when that nation ceased to exist. Some other laws were universal (the ten commandments, healthy foods, relationships, and some civil laws) which are still applicable to any human being in any part of the globe. These laws hold forever and even Jesus said that no iota shall pass from the law.

Paul simply explained the meaning of justification as we see below.

Read Acts 13:39."And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses."

Justification is to declare one innocent or guilty in an open, free and fair court system. In our case as we had seen above, all humanity is guilty. To be declare innocent therefore, the price for the guilt must be paid. This price was paid by Christ at the cross so anyone who accepts that his debt has been paid is declared innocent thanks to the blood of Jesus.

For example if I owe you money and you take me to court so that I am compelled to pay you, and a savior comes to my rescue and pays you the some total of my debt, the court shall justly free me. This is the same justice talked about in the verse you quoted above. If on the other hand I refuse to acknowledge the paid debt, I would still be compelled to pay of which if I cant, the court will justly condem me to hard labour, or eternal death in case it is the heavenly courts.

So why do you believe in the resurrection if Paul himself, who never saw Jesus alive, admitted that this was his gospel?

I believe in the resurrection because the Old Testament prophesied that Christ will resurrect, that the gospel writers (Matthew, Mark, and John) who were physically with Jesus wrote that He resurrected. That Luke who questioned eye witnesses, also concluded that He resurrected. That Paul, despite having seen Jesus Himself, preached together with Peter who was the greatest disciple, and also concluded that Jesus resurrected.

2 Timothy 2:8. "Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel."

The above verse can be read as, Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead accordin to my (grip_daddy's) gospel. Basically what I am saying is that it is according to the good news (gospel) I am passing to you.

So why do you have to believe that he was crucified and raised from the dead?

Same reason as I believe in the resurrection.

[Muhammad_4]

Just as you struggle with your belief in trinity and what it means, and how you can reconcile it with the belief in monotheism which is affirmed in the Old Testament , and just as you also struggle with everything that has to do with the crucifixion and its details, which is the basis of your belief in redemption which you believe is the reason for the crucifixion, I say: as confusion is inevitable for everyone who turns away from the light of revelation that came down from Allaah, similarly Christians are confused about the doctrine of redemption. (not offence)
Does redemption mean saving all of mankind, as John says: “…Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world” I John 2:1-2 (NIV)? OR is it only for those who believe and are baptized: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned” Mark 16:16 (NIV)? you answer that please.
Forgiveness of sins through the sinner’s repentance is what befits the kind and merciful God – not sacrifice and crucifixion and the shedding of blood. This is what the Bible says: I desire mercy, not sacrifice. For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners (to repentance)” Matthew 9:13 – NIV (the words “to repentance” do not appear in the NIV but are present in the “King James” or “Authorized” translation of the Bible).

[faiyyy]

Originally Posted by Muhammad_4

To grip_daddy,
Deuteronomy 24:16: "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin."
Jeremiah 31:30: "But every one shall die for his own iniquity ..."
Ezekiel 18:20: "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

That is why Israelites had to sacrifice lambs as a sin offering. remember it had no faults. the reason why we do not continue to do that anymore is coz Jesus already went through all that for our sake. Now all we do is to call upon him. ( Isa: 45:23, Rom 14:11, Phil 2:10) that was his purpose to this earth.

[grip_daddy]

Just as you struggle with your belief in trinity and what it means, and how you can reconcile it with the belief in monotheism which is affirmed in the Old Testament

Read Gen 1:26, 3:18, and 11:7 then tell me the interpretation of the word us in those verses. Also read Isaiah 9 and tell me why the son that is born to us is called the mighty God. The Old Testament affirms trinity more than the New Testament.

as confusion is inevitable for everyone who turns away from the light of revelation that came down from Allaah, similarly Christians are confused about the doctrine of redemption.

If there are Christians that are confused, then I am not one of them. Reading what you have posted so far as biblical contradiction tells me that you lack proper understanding to biblical texts, which therefore means that the confused party is you (due to lack of deeper analysis and conceptual application of these texts) but I hope some clarifications will come by as we continue with our discussions.

Does redemption mean saving all of mankind, as John says: “…Jesus Christ, the Righteous One. He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world” I John 2:1-2 (NIV)?

When you consider that everyone has sinned, and Jesus died for all, you will realise that redemption was for all. Redemption was, is, and shall forever remain universal.

OR is it only for those who believe and are baptized: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned” Mark 16:16 (NIV)? you answer that please.


The person whose redemption price has been paid must accept and acknowledge that he has been freed. For example, if there is a country that has slaves, then a person comes and pays for the slaves (let's say buys the slaves), then the slaves are told to go with the new master or remain within the country, would you now say that the price of those who refused to go with new master was not paid? No. The new master paid for every single slave, but the slaves must agree and accept the new master since the new master offered them a choice to accept or reject his offer.

In this light, our redemption price had been paid by the blood of Christ (dying for us), but for us to benefit from this death, we must believe, exercise faith, and be followers of Christ.

Forgiveness of sins through the sinner’s repentance is what befits the kind and merciful God –

When an individual has seen and realized that he is a sinner (from the concept that all have sinned) and known the consequences of sin, "for the wages of sin is death", he will know that his ultimate end is eternal death. That he is lost. That his life has no purpose. That he is wreckless, worthless, a useless being who deserves death and nothing else. When this individual then realizes that God the creator has mercies, that out of His love he sent His only begotten Son to die for him, to create an avenue in which his sins can be counted as though he didn't commit them, but were laid on the body of Christ who buried them in the earth at His death, then this sinner repents, begs for mercy, and asks for forgiveness, God shall surely forgive him.

not sacrifice and crucifixion and the shedding of blood. This is what the Bible says: I desire mercy, not sacrifice. For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners (to repentance)” Matthew 9:13 – NIV (the words “to repentance” do not appear in the NIV but are present in the “King James” or “Authorized” translation of the Bible).

God does not require sacrifices from man in order to forgive him because He is the one who provided the sacrifice. Hebrews 9 teaches that even the sacrifices that were offered during the Old Testament times could not remit sins, but were a foreshadow of Jesus great sacrifice. It was because of this sacrifice offered by Jesus that God could have a just way of granting pardon. As said earlier, the death and sacrifice of Jesus was the price through which man enslaved in sin could be freed. The slave did not have to pay for his freedom because the price had been paid by another. No one in the earth's history has offered any sacrifice to get God's forgiveness, so God does not require Sacrifices.

Question to you, why do you say that God does not require sacrifices by quoting the bible which also says that Jesus died for our sins? Why do you say that some parts of the bible are actually what God requires yet you dont believe in it?

[Muhammad_4]

In order to avoid misunderstanding, I would like to answer your last question before I go - in into the subject.I would like to clarify that when me or other Muslims criticise the Bible or the teachings of Christianity, we are not attacking "God's Word" or Jesus Christ, peace be upon him. From our Muslim point of view, we are defending Jesus and God's Word, which we have in the form of the Qur.aan. Muslim criticism is targeted at writings that some people claim are God's word, but we Muslim's simply don't accept their claim that they are really God's word.
In your extended answer to me, you went little out of the subject and touch the issue of Sonship (you mentioned that Jesus is only begotten son of God)and Crucufixion. You are not blamed for this since it was unavoided for your explanation. This has resulted for me too to go little bit out of topic (I hope that you will excuse me for this).
Having siad that: The Bible is telling different from that you are claiming, the Bible shows that Jesus was not the only begotten son of god!, long before Jesus was born, God said to David Psalms 2:7: "I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me (David): 'Thou art my son; this day have I begotten thee." So David is also God's begotten son. The meaning of "Son of God" is not literal but metaphorical. It can be anyone who is beloved by God. Jesus also said that God is not only his Father but also your Father (Matthew 5:45, 48).
About Crucifixion:
You talked about Jesus "death" But Suffering is often exaggerated in the Bible and termed "dead," as Paul said in I Corinthians 15:31: "I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ, I die daily" (i.e., I suffer daily).