So each one of us could have potentially been chosen by God as the messiah, as jesus "only" kept Himself from sinning, as all of us 'could"
So all humans are born untainted by sin, and ONLY when we freely chose to sin, God is estranged from us?
Warning: this may be dangerous for the faint of heart
Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by evangelist-7, Oct 3, 2012.
Page 3 of 4
-
-
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
It teaches against the Bible on several major topics.
IMO, the most interesting example is Qur'an's stories differ from those in Torah.
From the very beginning in Genesis, most stories differ.
IMO, this is to cast doubts on the veracity of our Scriptures.
News Flash! ... Satan --> "Gabriel" --> Mohammed --> Qur'an --> Islam
. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Do you believe all men are born spiritually dead in sin or not? -
Ecc 7:29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.
Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )
You can deny the scriptures, but they say God has made man upright. Man is not born a sinner. Romans 9:11 proves that little children have committed no sin.
You guys just don''t get it, sin is not a substance, or something you can inherit from your parents like blue eyes or red hair. Sin is a transgression of God's laws, it is a criminal act against God. Without law there is no transgression, so no man can be a sinner until he is old enough to understand God's laws. When a man understands right from wrong before God and willfully chooses to commit sin, this is when he becomes a sinner.
There is absolutely not one word of scripture that says all men are born sinners. You cannot show it because no such scripture exists. In fact, I have shown you scripture that says all men are made upright, and scripture that shows babies have not committed sin. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
This should be obvious to you since even you admit that once a person sins there is no natural reversal but necessitates a NEW CREATION. If your position had any merit it could be reversed just as it was initiated. The fact that it cannot demonstrates sin is more than mere actions and attitude but an irreversable governing inclination toward sin. That is precisely why the body of the elect must die or be supernaturally changed as the law of indwelling sin cannot be redeemed.
However, the existence of a SINFUL DISPOSITION and even SINFUL ACTIONS are possible without knowledge of law simply because sin is not defined or dependent upon understanding or realizing there is Law. The Law of God exists independent of and is not determined by human actions or knowlege of its existence or character. Otherwise, the Bible could never address sins due to ignorance. Ignorance does not change the nature of sin although it does change the judgement toward sin. Another reason why infants are not in danger of judgement even though they are sinners by nature/disposition and even though their actions are sinful in spite of their ignorance.
-
1 Cor 6:17 But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit.
Just as when a man and woman come together physically and a new person is created, when our spirit is cleansed of sin and joined to the Holy Spirit a new person is created or born again. This is what Calvinism absolutely fails to understand. It takes two persons to create a new person.
Now we are able to overcome sin because we have the Holy Spirit and the Word of God dwelling in us. Before this we operated in the flesh and obeyed the flesh. The flesh itself is not evil, but it lusts against the Spirit, it wants to do what it wants to do to satisfy itself. When we obey the flesh when it transgresses God's laws we are guilty of sin and corrupted.
-
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Furthermore, Paul says "the carnal" or NATURAL mind is in a CONDITION of sin (Rom. 8:7-8) and he does not qualify that by age or the first act of willful sin. Instead he contrasts it with another CONDITION "in the spirit" versus "in the flesh." There is no THIRD condition offered by Paul. Infants are born "in the flesh" and therefore the "NATURAL" refers to what comes with NATURAL birth as the those "in the Spirit" comes with SPIRITUAL birth.
Job 14:1 ¶ Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble.
2 He cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down: he fleeth also as a shadow, and continueth not.
3 And dost thou open thine eyes upon such an one, and bringest me into judgment with thee?
4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.
5 Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with thee, thou hast appointed his bounds that he bounds that he cannot pass;
This is a context of the condition of man at birth when BORN OF A WOMAN - v. 1 as he "COMETH FORTH" - v. 2 as "UNCLEAN" because the immediate human source (mother) is "UNCLEAN" in nature and nothing "UNCLEAN" can bring forth something "CLEAN" in nature and the topic here is consistently BIRTH right up to and including verse 4 as the infant life manifests this UNCLEAN nature as it "is of few days, and full of trouble" because of his UNCLEAN origin. -
It is essentially what Wesley taught and what Nazarene's now teach about sin. Sin, defined by Wesley, is the willful breaking of a known law of God. It goes right along with the idea that there is at least some good in people so they choose God. It is also a key part in rejecting the perseverance of the saints. Man's will overrides God's will.
There are a lot of problems in this line of theology but keeping strictly to what is and isn't sin my prof's at Nazarene Bible College could never answer my questions about holding to Wesley's definition of sin in light of the definitions of sin, iniquity and transgression from Psalm 51. They also could not explain their definition in light of God commanding a series of sacrifices for the unknowing breaking of God's law (Lev 4 and 5 and a few others). -
And your scripture from Job severely hurts your argument as Jesus was born of a woman.
Cause and effect? Satan was created perfect and he sinned. Adam and Eve were very good and they sinned. This proves that a sin nature is not necessary to sin, there goes your argument.
And you even admit man in Ecc 7:29 is plural! Well, try believing what the verse says. It says all men are made upright, which means righteous, without sin. -
Why not speak of the Jews who had the OT scriptures including the Psalms and Leviticus? They have NEVER interpreted any of these scriptures to teach Original Sin. They interpret Psalms 51 to teach we are born into a sinful world. This is what Job is saying, how can you bring something clean out of the unclean? It is the world around us that is unclean, we are naturally polluted by it, just as if you threw something clean into a mud puddle, it would be polluted by it.
The Jews teach man is born neutral, neither good or bad, but innocent. They had these same scriptures for thousands of years and never saw Original Sin in them. It was Augustine with his Manichean doctrine that all matter is evil that first taught OS. The Greek church immediately rejected Augustine's interpretation from a flawed Latin text. This is a fact of history. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Ridicule is your ultimate weapon as you again could not deal with my responses with any substantive replies and so you respond "blah, blah, blah"
Only if the sin nature (principle of indwelling death = spiritual separation) is "passed" down from the woman alone in human reproduction. The virigin birth demonstrates it does not but it is "passed" down from the male participant in birth. Hence CAUSE and EFFECT in regard to passing down of the "law of death" or "the law of sin" in all others born of women is due to male participation in the process of birth. By one "MAN" sin entered into the world and by one "MAN" we were made sinners.
Selective reading on your part! I also said, this verse speaks of a signular point in history where all were "made" by God but now individualization comes through REPRODUCTION AFTER ITS OWN KIND or "born of women" rather than "made" by God.
Finally, the context of Job 14 does not refer to the EXTERNAL world as the "unclean" element into which they are born but refers to the SOURCE from which they are born. Nowhere does verses 1-5 state or even imply that the EXTERNAL world is being referenced to.
What did I say? I said you would simply EXPLAIN AWAY any scripture that says clearly what it says and that is precisely what you attempted to do, unsuccessfully I might add. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
15 Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight.
16 How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water?
Note that Eliphaz is directly responding to Job's use of "clean" and "unclean" in Job 14:1-5 in regard to human nature received at birth and neither is speaking of the external environment of this material world as the cause.
Note that "righteous" is used as a synonym in the same verse for "clean" in regard to man "born of a woman" - v. 14
Note that "clean" is defined as sinlessness in verse 15 as even "the heavens" (plural) are being directly compared to God and the antynyms for "clean" are "abominable....filthy...iniquity" in verse 16.
Hence, the term "clean" refers to MORAL righteousness by both Job and Eliphaz as Eliphaz is responding directly to Job's use of "clean" and "unclean" in the context of human birth in regard to the human nature from the womb of the mother in Job 14:1-5. -
Thinkingstuff Active Member
Biblicist, what is your position on this topic?
I don't think using Mary's genetic material would necissarily cause Jesus to be a sinner. Sin is a condition of the soul which affects the body, mind, and will as well. Jesus being incarnate joins himself to humanity in all aspects save sin. However, using Mary's genetic material (blood) he would fully fulfill all prophesies given to David and Abraham. but Jesus' soul is certainly pure. -
Telling you what Qur'an says is telling you what I believe?
C'mon, get a clue ... thou hast AGAIN disqualified thouself from any serious credibility.
. -
Of course, your definition of sin is correct.
But, what we're talking about is ... Because of man's sin nature, he MUST sin!
Get it ... Got it ... Good.
. -
God had His reasons for not revealing everything in da black and white
i.e. written in black on white ... so they would be obvious to guys like you.
E.G. Jesus explained why He spoke in parables so much! And His reason proves da red.
. -
-
God said the Jews were spiritually blind and deaf.
God said He would not heal them of this.
God said He would disperse them to the 4 corners of the earth.
God did.
News Flash ...
The Jews have remained in this condition ... they still are spiritually blind and deaf.
Except for a few (so far) Messianic Jews (MJ).
God's promise to bring the Jews back together is done.
God's promise to place His Spirit in them, have a relationship with them, etc. is being done (in MJ).
. -
But, don't forget the other thread ... http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=81861
.
Page 3 of 4