Justification and concupisins. May 15th, 2024. Introduction. I was recently sent a copy of Ruined Sinners to Reclaim, a hefty book dedicated to a thorough treatment of total

depravity. It looks marvelous.

If you have any friends who are in the happy, happy joy camp, you should perhaps think about

getting this for them as a 918 page Christmas present should study them up a bit.

The friend who sent it to me suggested that I interact with the introduction and also with Stephen Wedgworth's

essay in the light of my interactions with Jared Moore on the whole vexed issue of concupiscence.

Having considered it, I think the council good.

I believe there are still some niggling doctrinal bits that we have not yet found a good place for.

And having read those two sections, it appears to me that Augustine hadn't found a good place for me either.

Allow me first to summarize my position yet again and then interact with some of the observations in the book. A summary of my position. Not all temptations are sinful. We know this because the Lord Jesus was tempted yet without sin, Hebrew

415. And when Adam and Eve were tempted, there was a point in that temptation

where they had not yet wavered, meaning that up to that point they were still

without blemish, tempted but no sin

anywhere yet. After the fall all unbelievers are dead in their trespasses and

sins, Ephesions 2 one through three. Con believers, although brought to life in Christ,

must still deal with their remaining sin,

their remaining corruption,

will also actively seeking to avoid the commission

of actual sins, whether in thought, word, or deed.

Raining sin is to be no more, but remaining sin remains.

The Westminster confession in addressing this topic makes a clear distinction

between our original corruption and what it calls quote unquote

...