Romans 1: The Fallen Nature of Man
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 июл 2024
- We transitioned into providing an exegetical explanation of Romans 1 starting verse 18.
All Dividing Line Highlights' video productions and credit belong to Alpha and Omega Ministries®. If this video interested you, please visit aomin.org/ or www.sermonaudio.com/go/336785
For James White's political content, click here:
www.bitchute.com/channel/0u0P...
Original sin has more empirical evidence than many scientific theories.
James Sheffield can you please elaborate a little bit on your understanding of original sin?
@Gideon Peyton More sin in the world.
This chapter has opened my eyes to the importance of worldview.
Hey guys. Thanks again for these highlights videos. They are great to watch when I only have 20 minutes or so.
This is the most crucial, needed exegesis of our time or any time.
Going through this slowly is so helpful. In a debate, Steve Gregg insisted that Romans 1 only applies to unbelievers who "suppress the truth". He then kept cutting off James White when he tried to explain why the thought carries through Romans 3 and all men are in view!
This kind of exegesis of Romans 1 revolutionized my thinking and the way I communicate to non-believers.
I have a question for anyone who can provide a biblical answer.
Im having trouble with understanding the "universality" of Romans 1:18 - 32.
I agree with James that it's speaking of all mankind in vs.18 - 23. But how do you explain the transition into the sin of homosexuality and the other list of sins from v.24? Surely all mankind is not homosexuals? What am I missing?? The "them" whom God gave over - in vs.24, 26, 28 can't be the same "them" in v.19 and "they" in v.20 -21. Where is the transition?
How does everyone miss this, the wrath of God is being revealed against all ungodliness, meaning, US and the world. He is addressing US in chapter 2 comparing us metaphorically with Israel. Only Christians KNOW Him, therefore, who do you really think this passage is talking to?
Why this logical jump from ignoring natural signs to worshipping created things to making idols to homosexuality? It seems like being gay isn't directly related to idolatry. Does anyone have some insight on this? Thanks
Thanks for sharing your view on these scriptures. Maybe I’m missing something here but how can you darken a foolish heart if it is (dead) totally depraved, if it is blind and deaf ? Is it some kind of double darkness,deadness or double blindness or double deafness?
I'd recommend reading the Canons of Dort, which is the primary source of the doctrine for which TULIP seeks to remind us of. The 'Total' in total depravity isn't a claim of the quantity of our depravity such that we cannot be any more depraved. Rather it is a claim to the extent of our depravity.
I liken it to mixing a spoonful of salt into a glass of water. Is the water saturated with salt? No, you can still mix in several more spoonfuls and the water can become saltier. But is there any part of the water where the salt has not affected it? No, the spread of the salt is total, no part of the water is free from salt. (The Bible uses the same metaphor, except using the elements of bread and yeast.)
So are we as evil as we can possibly be? No, we can become much much worse. But is there any part of us that sin has not touched? No, sin has reached every part of our being (the totality of our being) such that there is no aspect that is untainted by sin.
2 Timothy 3:13
“But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.”
@@jamessheffield4173 Sorry, so no, strictly, speaking, they don't. The invisible qualities and outward display, I mean - albeit under a 'glass darkly'.
They show Adam's invisible qualities, and Eve's, and the Apple's, and the serpent's, just as well.
And what is a 'natural man', too?
Whilst, also, why did this whole method, not work, with numerous angels?
@@chrissonofpear1384 I give you a TULIP. Blessings.
"We transitioned into providing an exegetical explanation of Romans 1 starting verse 18." Why not start at the beginning?
Hold the truth in unrighteousness
Romans 8:21
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Their hearts became darker because they isupressed the truth of God. We were not born God haters.
Is this suppression considered their free will?
If Romans one and 1 Corinthians 6 are talking about the same thing you have a massive problem. One says you are turned over and one says you were washed
So much for inborn Total Depravity (TD) and the supposed inability to respond to apologetics. What JW says about Romans 1:19-21 (what the Bible itself says) refutes this reformed dogma. How can someone "glorify God" who is incapable of faith? LOL! Depending on who he has an issue with he will flip his diatribe.
Laughable and sad.
No one glorifies God. He glorifies Himself. Duh!
the verse says "they did *not* glorify Him as God."
If you believe being held responsible for this necessitates being able to do it, you are just reading your own position into the verse. As a reformed person, I don't assume this means they actually can glorify God, and the words of this verse do not make that assertion.
@@landonsmith348
Right.
Being condemned to eternal perdition for not doing something implies the ability. Add in the Reformed teaching of God decreeing these pagan's evil desires and concomitant actions and of course you are going to develop an illogical adhoc response of "...doesn't require ability". It's nothing but absurd sophistry. Laughable and demonic.