Posted by webbie on [27 Dec 2009 09:55PM]
In Reply to: Question: posted by a on [27 Dec 2009 06:59PM]
jbaber@prodigy.net  Notify me about Responses? (yes)

We here at CMUSA have been facing one particular problem since we began preaching in 1974 (Jed) and 1977 (me). That problem is in getting people to come face to face with their guilt. Until a man comes to 'own' his culpability, he can not be saved.

The Bible says this:

2Co 10:4 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
2Co 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

A strong hold is any thought, philosophy, argument, belief, false scientific assertion,... ANYTHING that people hide behind to justify their rebellion against God. The NUMBER ONE excuse over the last 32 years has been that we will not be judged because we are sinners by ineritance. The logic goes that it would be unjust for God to send us to Hell for doing what it is impossible for us to avoid. Inherited sin nature comforts the sinner in his sin.

More than anything else, having heard this excuse times without number, I am convinced that the doctrine of inherited sin nature must not be true. The truth is to do one thing - SET US FREE. This doctrine accomplishes the exact opposite. It ensures that people fail to be set free from sin.

All theological arguments aside, the fruit of this doctrine is foul. It does not bring anyone to freedom from sin. It instead comforts the sinner in his sin because God is just and can not fault a man for doing only that which he must by his sinful nature do. It is the biggest stronghold for sinners. We must tear it down.

Going back to judging things by their fruit, think about what the doctrine of inherited sin nature does. It removes guilt from the sinner, by telling the sinner he had no choice in committing sins. He had to sin. This was the very first reaction to sin in the Bible:

Ge 3:11 ¶ And he said, Who told thee that thou wast naked? Hast thou eaten of the tree, whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat?
12 And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat.
13 And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.

The first reaction is to try to put the blame for sin on someone else. That is what the inherited sin nature doctrine makes possible. Men ever since have been hiding from responsibility for their sins by blaming it on Adam, just as surely as Adam tried to blame Eve, and Eve the devil.

If it were not used by most of humanity to excuse their guilt, I would have no problem with the doctrine. But it is the number one dodge.

1Ti 6:3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness,
4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions,

All doctrine should lead to godliness. Is there even one aspect of the inherited sin nature doctrine that leads to godliness. In 32 years, I have NEVER heard of one.

wm

Send To Printer

Follow Ups: