More Interaction With Mr. James Pelton On Christianity & Race I

BLMc responds,

In the previous post I did not say that biology was the cause of sin. I said that when desires and lusts occur the reality of our biology in those desires and lusts can’t be cast aside. So, I think we agree that biology alone is not the cause of sin. However, Scripture clearly teaches that our biology is far more influential then your Gnostic type reasoning is allowing for;

Rom 7:21 I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. Rom 7:22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, Rom 7:23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Rom 7:24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?

1Co 9:26 Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not beating the air; 1Co 9:27 but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified.

2Co 4:7a But we have this treasure in earthen vessels

In terms of our Lord Christ, the fact that He did not have a sin nature surely means something in this whole discussion. Calvin touches on this in his commentary;

“Thus he (Jesus) not only really became a man, but he also assumed all the qualities of human nature. There is, however, a limitation added, without sin; for we must ever remember this difference between Christ’s feelings or affections and ours, that his feelings were always regulated according to the strict rule of justice, while ours flow from a turbid fountain, and always partake of the nature of their source, for they are turbulent and unbridled.”

Because our biological impulses are intertwined with a sin nature Jesus didn’t have they are far more influential than you are allowing for, as seen in the Scriptures I noted above.

Pelton writes,

To say “biology influences behavior” is not to say “biology causes sin.” Influence is not determinism.

BLMc responds,

As long as we agree with the passages I posted above (Rom. 7, I Cor. 9, II Cor. 4) we can move on from this.

Pelton writes;

Yes, God created nations and families. That’s good. But sin didn’t enter through creational order—it entered through Adam’s disobedience.

Bret responds,

And Adam was part of the creational order… right?

Pelton writes,

The Bible doesn’t say we sin because we’re in this or that biological group. It says we sin because we’re in Adam (Romans 5:12–19). Saying “grace restores nature” is true— Saying “grace blesses sin-influenced nature” is false.

Bret responds,

Yes, we sin because we are in Adam but that truth doesn’t negate the idea that patterns of sin can’t run in familial lines. For an overview of this idea see,

https://biblehub.com/topical/g/generational_patterns_of_sin.htm

And I wonder, could you please point out to me where I ever said, “grace blesses sin-influenced nature?” I have no idea where from where that is coming.

James Pelton writes,

Traducianism holds that the soul is inherited, not that sin is encoded in DNA. It means we inherit a spiritual nature, not a physical mutation. Even if genetics predispose someone to a temper, the moral choice to act in anger is sin. Otherwise, you’ve collapsed moral agency into determinism—which Scripture does not allow.

BLMc responds,

There you go again… divorcing the spiritual from the corporeal. That’s Gnostic James. Since man can resist the devil knowing he will flee we know that determinism isn’t true as you falsely accuse me of. However, the genetic predisposition proves my point as Scripture does in Romans 7, I Cor. 9. and II Cor. 4 as I posted above.

James Pelton writes,

You talk about Jesus being a “supernatural exception.” But that proves my point. If sin were genetic, God would have to stop the genetics for Jesus to be sinless. Instead, Scripture teaches that Jesus shared in our humanity (Hebrews 2:14) without sin. That shows sin is not transmitted through DNA.

Bret responds,

Have you never heard of generational sins James? This primer might help you out here. Give it a read. There is much more on the subject out there. As I said, this link is only a primer. It demonstrates again, that you are Gnostic.

https://biblehub.com/topical/g/generational_patterns_of_sin.htm

You keep referring to our Lord Jesus Christ but you do realize that he was born without a sin nature right? This means that like Adam, He had no predisposition to sin. That is not true of us James, since we do have a sin nature and since that sin nature is expresses itself as Paul states above.

I think, if I am reading you right James, that you would say “yes” to the question, “Was it possible for Jesus to sin?” On the other hand I would answer that question “no” since He was predestined not to sin and since He had no sin nature. On the other hand we have a sin nature and that “law of sin is in our members.”

You see, James, I am not Gnostic like you. I understand man is spiritual and corporeal. I also understand that man’s spirituality and corporeality are intertwined and can’t be divorced like you are doing. Man’s sin nature is coded in man genetically though that sin nature is not restricted to man’s genetics. When I receive my glorified body I will be the same me but without the encoded sin in my genetics and without the sin nature. It just strikes me James that without some understanding like what I am communicating you are left with Gnosticism…. you are left isolating and divorcing the corporeal from the spiritual realities that comprise man.

James Peloton writes,

I’m not denying the body or downplaying the goodness of creation. I’m simply affirming: •Sin is spiritual and moral •Salvation is spiritual transformation •Identity in Christ transcends but doesn’t erase earthly distinctions That is classic, biblical orthodoxy—not Gnosticism. “The body is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.” — 1 Corinthians 6:13

BLMc responds,

Yes you are. Your most certainly are. I hope I have demonstrated that above. Sin is indeed spiritual and moral but that does not mean that it isn’t biological as well.

Rom 7:23 but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. Rom 7:24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?

Regeneration, is indeed, spiritual transformation, but that transformation doesn’t mean that we quit contending with and against sin in this life. Greed, lust, deceit, gluttony, sloth … we continue to war against these sins in this life and partly because our very real corporeality urges us in sinful directions. We await our full transformed bodies … our glorified bodies, where all these sinful bodily biological desires, as well as our sin nature, will be done. To deny what I’ve said is Gnostic James. It is a denial of our the sin that is part and parcel of our corporeality.

James Peloton writes,

I’m not dividing body and spirit. im distinguishing them, like Scripture does. Calvin also affirms that: •In Christ, we are spiritually equal •Our creational identity is not the source of sin •Grace doesn’t validate the fallen expressions of our nature, but heals them Calvin would never say different ethnic groups have lingering, God-ordained spiritual deficiencies that salvation “restores.”

BLMc responds;

Really… Calvin would never say that? Well, let’s go to the well and consider a wee bit what Calvin said on this subject;

“Regarding our eternal salvation, it is true that one must not distinguish between man and woman, or between king and a shepherd, or between a German and a Frenchman. Regarding policy, however, we have what St. Paul declares here; for our, Lord Jesus Christ did not come to mix up nature, or to abolish what belongs to the preservation of decency and peace among us….Regarding the kingdom of God (which is spiritual) there is no distinction or difference between man and woman, servant and master, poor and rich, great and small. Nevertheless, there does have to be some order among us, and Jesus Christ did not mean to eliminate it, as some flighty and scatterbrained dreamers [believe].”

John Calvin (Sermon on 1 Corinthians 11:2-3)

“The inhabitants of Crete, of whom he speaks with such sharpness were undoubtedly very wicked. The Apostle, who is wont to reprove mildly those who deserved to be treated with extreme severity, would never have spoken so harshly of the Cretans, if he had not been moved by very strong reasons. What term more reproachful than these opprobrious epithets can be imagined; that they were “lazy, devoted to the belly, destitute of truth, evil beasts?” Nor are these vices charged against one or a few persons, but he condemns the whole nation.”

John Calvin (Commentary on Titus 1:12)

“Let us perceive that their are wicked nations; let us examine their vices in order to keep ourselves from (learning) them. The French, for example, are more corrupt in their attire than other nations. Why? Because they have always had the folly of having to dress the body now this way, or the neck now that way – there is no style they have not seen fit to try, and God has condemned them and had them in derision, because of this mad curiosity which they have always had. And it is more today than ever.

Thus it is true, that all the world must be completely corrupt, and everything topsy turvy now. Yet, be that as it may, we must still take note of the particular vices of the nations, so that we know how to keep ourselves from them.”  John Calvin (Sermon on I Cor. 11:11-16)

“All are not created on equal terms … This God has testified, not only in the case of single individuals; He has also given a specimen of it in the whole posterity of Abraham, to make it plain that the future condition of each nation was entirely at His disposal.”

John Calvin (Institutes Vol. 3, ch. 21, section 5)

Now, I’m sure Jame you will insist that Calvin does not say what he is clearly saying here about this subject but that is par for the course for people who don’t want the greats saying what they say because it contradicts their errant views.

I’ll leave you with one more quote from a distinguished Reformed theologian of the 20th century who wrote on this subject;

“We would maintain that all the necessary chromosomes required for the later development of the various racial strains now extant were already present in the perfect seed within the body of the unfallen Adam, even though his body and his chromosomes too must also have been adversely affected later as the result of his sin.”

Francis Nigel Lee

James Peloton writes,

That’s not Reformed theology—it’s ethnonationalism in theological garb. “The nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light…” — Revelation 21:24 That doesn’t prove ethnic traits are spiritually significant in the new creation—it shows that the diversity of the nations is redeemed to glorify God.

BLMc responds,

But ethno-nationalism (a tautology if there ever was one) is what Reformed theology teaches. Doubt me? Purchase a copy of “Who Is My Neighbor” and go to the Reformed / Presbyterian / Puritan section and see what all these chaps said in favor of ethno-nationalism. You just don’t know what you’re talking about James and you’re talking out of your hat.

If ethnic traits are not spiritually significant in the new creation then what are the nations doing there in their nations?

James, the nations are diverse precisely because they are diverse in their ethnic traits. Clearly, God delights in these diverse ethnic traits in the New Jerusalem because those traits remain as glorified.

Keep in mind James if Christianity does not teach ethno-nationalism the only option left is for it to teach either Gnosticism or some variant of Marxism, which has always pushed the same thing your pushing and that is the elimination of the ethnic distinctiveness of the nations.

James Peloton writes,

It (Revelation 21) doesn’t say “and their generational curses or weaknesses are retained and celebrated.”

BLMc responds,

I don’t know why you are repeating this canard — especially given the fact that I never said anything close to that. Clearly, as existing in the New Jerusalem the nations are glorified so that all generational curses and all sinful weaknesses removed.

James Peloton writes,

It actually more supports the point I am trying to make “Cultural Marxism” is about tearing down institutions and eliminating distinctions. I’m not doing that. I affirm God created us male and female, and made nations. But Scripture is clear: in Christ, we are one body (Eph. 2:14–16), and our old selves have died (Col. 3:3).

BLMc Responds,

Let me quote a distinguished Reformed theologian that remains alive;

“Scripture, as I read it, does not require societies, or even churches, to be integrated racially. Jews and Gentiles were brought together by God’s grace into one body. They were expected to love one another and to accept one another as brothers inthe faith. But the Jewish Christians continued to maintain a distinct culture, and house churches were not required to include members of both groups.”

John Frame,
“Racism, Sexism, Marxism”

Spiritually, we are one body but the creational distinctions remain James. This is seen even in the Church where because of the creational distinctions women are not allowed to rule over men. If they were spiritually one the way you are Gnostically trying to argue women would be allowed to rule over men. Creational distinctions remain James. Because of creational distinctions we celebrate the presence of Korean churches and Hmong churches in our midst. If creational distinctions disappeared once people are in Christ, as you suggest, then denominations would demand that these Korean, and Hmong churches be eliminated.

James Peloton writes,

That’s not Marxist—that’s gospel transformation. Ironically, saying that certain peoples carry unchangeable spiritual traits rooted in biology is much closer to Darwinian racial theory than biblical Christianity. Scripture teaches that all have sinned, all can be redeemed, and in Christ there is one new man (Eph. 2:15). Grace doesn’t reinforce fallen nature—it transforms it.

BLMc Responds,

Yeah … it is Cultural Marxism… though you can’t see it … yet.

And I don’t deny that God has people in every tribe, tongue and nation as in their tribes, tongues, and nations.

Oh… you accuse me of Darwinian racial theory. Allow me to accuse you of Boasian racial theory. Look him up. Probably one of the most influential men of the 20th century that very few have heard of.