Quote
straw said:
I think the idea of absolutes though defending a doctrinal position, destroys exegesis of Genesis in as much as the true consideration of the nature of man. To say as you have that the entire nature of man was corrupted only half expresses the true state of man. Perhaps a softer line might not be injurious to your Bible thumping routine.
Straw,

Now what is this new "wrinkle" you have tossed out above? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/scratch1.gif" alt="" /> You don't like "absolutes"? And, you don't believe the biblical teaching concerning the consequences of the Fall which have been classically known, taught and believed, i.e., "Total Depravity"? Either the consequences of the Fall left man totally alienated from God, under God's wrath and condemnation, without any righteousness whatsoever and a corrupt nature which is at enmity with God and all that is good with no desire nor ability to change or man possesses some good and/or the ability to commune with God? Which is it?

See the following for a description and defense of the historic doctrine of the Church:

- Presbyterian Doctrine of Total Depravity, by Thomas M. Gregory
- Total Depravity, by Lorraine Boettner
- Total Depravity, by Gordon Girod
- Adam's Fall and Mine, by R.C. Sproul
- The Sinfulness of Man's Natural State, by Thomas Boston

In His grace,

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]