The Origin of Sin--PART III

Why then are you debating me?

You agree that God wills for evil to exist, right?

You agree that God has a purpose for all evil, right?

You agree that that purpose is noble and divine, right?

You agree that God made it so on purpose that evil would most certainly come to pass, right?

If yes to all of these, then why are we debating?

It is NOT wicked if the motive is pure.

It is really that simple.

Two people set out to kill Hitler. They partner in it.
One person wants to kill him because he is so commissioned by his government which governs a nation sure to be obliterated by Hitler if he is not stopped. His motive is patriotism.
The other person wants to kill him because he has an insatiable blood lust and can kill this man without consequence. The idea of legally killing a man appeals to him greatly. He loves to kill people and he is good at it. He relishes the idea of seeing a man bleed and die.

They both working together and at the same time kill Hitler. The same deed. Two VERY different motives. One was a murderer when he killed Hitler, the other was a hero. Same deed but by no means were the two participants morally equivalent. No decent person could accuse the first of murder and no decent person could think highly of the second.

No it is not either... or...
This is a False Dilemma.

I am not saying that God does evil, so there is no need for me to point this out.

But I did provide a very clear quote from Edwards saying that God both permits AND decrees evil.

No it is not. This is not accurate. I have not said that. My system abandons the origin of evil to mystery but at the same time ACCEPTS what the Word of God teaches concerning the matter.

No it does not represent what I have been arguing.

Answer the questions posed to you earlier and you will clearly see this.

 

And one takes his fleshly nature from the woman as much as from the man.

 

Is that a Scriptural term?

Lots of reasons, but mostly because Adam and Christ are two representatives of mankind, one in death and the other in life. Adam was not born of a virgin, so it has nothing to do with Christ's virgin birth.

 

Then why didn't Mary pass the sin nature to Jesus?

 

It is a theological term that refers to our sin nature inherited from and passed down from Adam.

Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (Romans 5:18)

Because of the sin of Adam judgment has come upon all men. Condemnation has come upon all men. That judgment and condemnation comes through the seed of a man. The promise of a Messiah was through the seed of a woman (Gen.3:15). That way He would escape the condemnation and judgment (the sin nature) that is passed down through Adam. There is no other way that Christ could be born free from sin.

 

My time is about up here, but Earth Wind and Fire knows how to get a hold of me.

Suffice it to say, that I am not saying that God does evil.

It is not possible for God to do evil.

All that he does is good.

If you will answer those questions that I have asked you to address multiple times now you will see this.

 

So long brother.....check your e-mails

 

God bless you guys!!:thumbsup:

It has been edifying!:love2:

 

double post

 

Hopefully no one is too deeply troubled by not being able to explain the unexplainable.

Ecclesiastes 3:11 He hath made every thing beautiful in his time: also he hath set the world in their heart, so that no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end.​

Romans 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!​

We're not asked to understand every nook and cranny of God's works but rather to trust Him, we can all do that.​

Proverbs 5
5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.
6 In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
7 Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.
8 It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones.​

Proverbs 18:10 The name of the LORD is a strong tower: the righteous runneth into it, and is safe.​

HankD​

 

No "Y" chromosome?

Just pondering. No matter what He is still our Savior.

HankD

 

Your entire premise is flawed. You are arguing if God commits a sin, it is then no longer a sin, but a good act.

Using this logic Christ cold have succumbed to any of Satan's temptations in the wilderness as if He would have sinned, it would not have really been a sin but an act of good.

 

You're still thinking of sin, death and evil as things. As if an evil man is one who is in all ways whole, but is contaminated by something additional, and you think this contamination is somehow transfered through the male reproductive cells.

An evil man is a man who is NOT whole. An evil man is not contaminated, but corrupted. Something isn't added to him, something is taken. Adam lost it in the Garden (so did Eve). And that thing is life. No longer living, Adam could not beget living children.

That is what is meant when the Scriptures say that in Adam all sinned. Adam could not give life, neither could Eve, and neither could Mary. Christ's life is in Himself. He is His own reason for being. Incorruptible, impeccable, undying. He is whole in Himself. You think a Y chromosome, a dust spec, is going to bring Him down?

 

True

The Scriptures do not say this.

The Scriptures do not say this either.

 

I quoted you Romans 5:18, so yes the Scriptures do say that the judgment and condemnation handed down from Adam to man would escape Christ if he were not born of man.
That coupled with Gen.3:15 (the seed of a woman), and with Paul's words of Gal.4:4 "made of a woman" give enough evidence that the virgin birth was necessary for Christ to avoid the sin nature that comes upon man because of Adam's sin.

We are children of wrath; children of disobedience, by our own nature fulfill the desires our flesh and of our mind. (Eph.2:2,3).
Our innate nature is our sinful nature inherited from Adam.
It cannot be changed. We are born with it.

Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. (Jeremiah 13:23)
--The Ethiopian has no power to change his skin.
--The leopard has no power to change his spots.
--And man, because of his nature, has no power to do good apart from the saving grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. He needs a new nature. He is born with a sin nature. That is the plain teaching of this verse.

The Scriptures do teach that Christ had to be born of a virgin to avoid the sin nature, as I have demonstrated above. Man inherits a sin nature.
Why then the virgin virgin birth? What purpose would God have in it? A simple fulfillment of prophecy? No, much more than that! He was the God-man. He had to be born the sinless Son of man, without sin. No man is born without sin. Christ because of his virgin birth was born without sin. He is the only one.

 

Being born of a virgin was for a sign. Anything beyond that is eisegesis.

 

Pure unadulterated opinion with a refusal to look at the totality of Scripture.

IMO, it is sad to see what I perceive to be an attack on such a fundamental doctrine as the Virgin Birth of Christ by evangelical Christians, particularly by Baptists.

 

Were you describing your view...because what I stated was biblical. Your premise must be arrived at by reading into the text things that are not there.

The Roman Catholics invented the Immaculate Conception to deal with the eisegetical viewpoint you have stated. Is the Immaculate Conception (not to be confused with the Incarnation as most believers I know do) a fundamental, or even orthodox for that matter?