Are we born with SIN?

[Proclaimer]

Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Feb. 16 2006,14:52)

How do you define “sin”? Do you think that babies are guilty of this, (i.e. your definition of “sin”)?

Romans 14:23
But the man who has doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and everything that does not come from faith is sin.

1 Corinthians 15:17
And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.

I wouldn't say babies are guilty of sin. They maybe born into it if the flesh nature is sin however.

1 Corinthians 15:22
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.

But for me what is important is that Christ died for ALL so we can live.

[Proclaimer]

Quote (Cubes @ Feb. 17 2006,18:07)

Quote You are the first person, that I know of, to say that “Christ inherited sin”. Either I misunderstand what you mean by that, or you have just disqualified Messiah as the “lamb without spot”, (1 Peter 1:19). Are you simply saying that Messiah was born into a sinful world where he would be taught sin by sinful people from an early age, or are you saying that he inherited “sin guilt” from his ancestors? We are getting into semantics here. Christ himself never sinned. However he was born of the virgin Mary, a woman who though was found pleasing in God's sight, was nonetheless counted among, “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.” So unless Many is exempt from that criteria then we have to accept that she was fully human and had also earned the wages of sin. So much so that she did die. It is written of her son Jesus: Hebrews 2:14 Because God's children are human beings-made of flesh and blood-Jesus also became flesh and blood by being born in human form. For only as a human being could he die, and only by dying could he break the power of the Devil, who had the power of death. 15 Only in this way could he deliver those who have lived all their lives as slaves to the fear of dying. and 16 We all know that Jesus came to help the descendants of Abraham, not to help the angels. 17 Therefore, it was necessary for Jesus to be in every respect like us, his brothers and sisters, so that he could be our merciful and faithful High Priest before God. He then could offer a sacrifice that would take away the sins of the people. 18 Since he himself has gone through suffering and temptation, he is able to help us when we are being tempted. So I suppose that what I am saying is that, through Adam, Christ took on our nature and so could die. However, he himself obviously never sinned… adding to the mix is his Father's Holy Spirit which conceived him which obviously overcomes anything and changes us sinful creatures to the sons of God so that we too are without blemish in the beloved. So if God says Jesus is without blemish, he is without blemish. Who am I to disagree? However, it still does not change the fact that he became the son of man for our sake that he might know us in our need as the scriptures point out. If Mary's gene's did not present him with those human challenges, then again, why Psalms 8 and Hebrews? Why did he take on our form and flesh being born a little lower than the Elohiym (angels)? Quote I thought that a definition of “sin” was the only thing necessary for us to have a coherent discussion, but perhaps I should also ask people what they mean by “inherited sin”. I start with you, Cubes. Does “inherited sin” mean babies are born guilty before YHWH? YHWH has grace on whom he would have grace, and I believe that he extends such grace to children and does not hold them accountable until a certain age, which is why we are called to teach them when they are young. Still, the wages (something earned) of sin is death. And babies die. Therefore it has to be as a result of inherit sin through their human parents and the fact that essentially, their nature are also affected in the first Adam. Quote Also, it is important to note that Adam was not created immortal. Immortality was a reward for obedience. He failed the test of obedience therefore he failed to obtain the reward. Nothing in his nature had to change for him to die. He was already mortal. All men are mortal, and it has always been so. Messiah did not have to have a “mutated nature” to die. He simply had to be mortal, like Adam was created: I tend rather to see it in this context: 16 But the Lord God gave him this warning: “You may freely eat any fruit in the garden 17 except fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. [/B]If you eat of its fruit, you will surely die.” There had been no talk of death prior to this. But it must also be noted that, Adam was lacking in the knowledge of good and evil… and now comes the verse which you cited: Genesis 3:22-24: “And the LORD God said, 'The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever' … Adam (and Eve) were never forbidden to eat of the Tree of Life and so live forever! The command was only against the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Since their basic nature changed in disobedience, God obviously did not want to seal their sinful fate eternally for Messiah had to come and breakthrough as the second Adam. With all our good intentions, we could not will ourselves to do good and to be without sin. It would make the cross of Christ in vain if we could have saved ourselves. But having said that, God still expects us to desire to live for him.

A good post Cubes.

[david]

Quote

Secondarily, if we are “born with sin” by inheritance, so was Yahshua. He is a son of Adam (Luke 3:38). To say that he is not really a descendant of Adam, (1 John 4:3), is to deny the many scriptures which say that he would be the seed of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Jesse, David, etc.. This is the biggest problem with the “inherited sin” doctrine. It either makes Yahshua guilty of sin by birth, or it turns scripture into a false witness as to who his anscestors would be.

Hi Whatistrue.
Let's look at this “biggest problem” of inherited sin as well as your assumptions.

MATTHEW 1:18
“During the time his mother Mary was promised in marriage to Joseph, she was found to be PREGNANT BY HOLY SPIRIT before they were united.” (Matthew 1:18)
What, though, about Mary? Did her egg cell, or ovum, contribute at all toward her pregnancy?
Yes, you are right. As you say, in view of God’s promises made to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Judah, and King David—Mary’s forefathers—the child born would have to be their genuine descendant. (Genesis 22:18; 26:24; 28:10-14; 49:10; 2 Samuel 7:16)
How else could the child born to Mary be a rightful heir of those divine promises? He would have to be her actual son.—Luke 3:23-34.
LUKE 1:30,31
“Have no fear, Mary, for you have found favor with God; and, look! you will conceive in your womb and give birth to a son, and you are to call his name Jesus.”
Conception requires that an egg become fertile. Apparently, Jehovah God caused an ovum in Mary’s womb to become fertile, accomplishing this by the transferal of the life of his only-begotten Son from the spirit realm to earth.—Galatians 4:4.

WhatIsTrue, please answer the following based on what you know from experience or from books or whereever:
1. Could a child conceived in this way by an imperfect woman be perfect and free from sin in his physical organism?
2. How do the laws of heredity work when there is a union of perfection with imperfection?

Remember that holy spirit was employed in transferring the perfect life force of God’s Son and causing the conception. This canceled out any imperfection existing in Mary’s ovum, thereby producing a genetic pattern that was perfect from its start.
“HOLY SPIRIT WILL COME UPON YOU, and power of the Most High will
OVERSHADOW YOU. FOR THAT REASON also what is born will be called HOLY, God’s Son.” (Luke 1:35)
Yes, God’s holy spirit formed, as it were, a protective wall so that no imperfection or hurtful force could blemish the developing embryo from conception on.
Clearly, Jesus owed his perfect human life to his heavenly Father, not to any man. Jehovah “prepared a body” for him, and Jesus—from conception onward—was truly “UNDEFILED, SEPARATED FROM SINNERS.”—Hebrews 7:26; 10:5.

I will be waiting for your answers.

david.

[WhatIsTrue]

Cubes, T8, and David,

I re-read this discussion topic to make sure that I understood where everyone was coming from, and I noticed something quite remarkable:

Not one of you has addressed the most relevant scriptural passage on this topic!

It's been quoted at least a couple of times, and not one of you has had anything to say about it.  Yet, it is the least ambiguous scriptural statement on the question we are trying to answer.  Are we born with sin?  This is what Ezekiel 18:20 says:

“The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”

So, YHWH says, “The son shall not bear the guilt of the father.”

You say, “Babies are born with sin – sin from their father Adam.”

Do these sound like completely opposite statements?  They do to me.  So, until one of you actually addresses this scripture – (if you read the whole chapter you will see that these words are spoken directly by YHWH) – and tells me how you can “inherit sin” and still have this passage be true, I don't see where there is any argument to be had.  You have all – (I think) – agreed that babies don't commit sin, and this passage says that babies don't bear the guilt of their fathers.  So where does your doctrine that babies are sinful come from?

David,

You wrote:

Quote

WhatIsTrue, please answer the following based on what you know from experience or from books or whereever: 1. Could a child conceived in this way by an imperfect woman be perfect and free from sin in his physical organism? 2. How do the laws of heredity work when there is a union of perfection with imperfection?

The book I appeal to is scripture.  Ezekiel 18 renders your first question irrelevant.  No one is born “with sin in his physical organism”.  We are each responsible for our own sin.  Your second question sounds like the kind of question a Greek philosopher would ask.  I don't think that scripture addresses the “laws of heredity” between perfect and imperfect, so I haven't a clue as to the answer.  Common sense says, though, that if you mix something perfect with something imperfect, you get something imperfect.

In any case, you keep talking about sin as though it were genetic, but I don't see any scripture to support that.

Cubes,

I finally understand where you are coming from.  You are filtering all of your understanding through half of a verse quoted out of context:

“The wages of sin is death.”

Here's the full verse:

Romans 6:23 “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

Is this verse contrasting normal everyday mortal death – (the kind that even trees, birds, and bacteria experience) – with eternal life?  Or, is it contrasting the second death with eternal life?  I happen to think that it is the latter, and the preceding verses in the passage seem to support that:

Romans 6:15-23
“What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.  And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.  I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.
For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness.  What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death.  But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life.  For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

This whole passage is about obedience, and to whom we are obedient.  It both defines sin – “lawlessness” – and describes the end result.  It is not about being “born sinful” and therefore having to die.  The apostles were faithful, and will certainly partake in the gift of eternal life, yet they died mortal deaths too.  I believe that you are misusing this passage when you say that babies have “earned” death.  Paul is not talking to babies.  He is talking to full grown adults who have the choice to present themselves “slaves to sin” or “slaves to righteousness”.  After all:

“The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”

[Cubes]

Hello WIT:

I understand Ezekiel 18:20 to be different from the foundational sin that took place in Eden which polluted everything and everyone on earth for which all living things  die.  Ezekiel 18:20 is applicable post Eden/Adam.  It applies to what we do now and has effect on who escapes or partakes of the second death.  What happened in Eden was not quite the same.  

First and foremost, I'd like to acknowledge that there are two types of deaths written of in scripture which I believe to have no similarities:  1) the first death — sleep    2) the second death — eternal anguish.

I understand that the first death is automatic, in that just about everyone got a pass in a class action lawsuit where God Almighty declared the entire human race –guilty and deserving of the first death– in Adam.

With the exception of the group that shall be alive and so caught up when Jesus returns, all the saints of God die as do all the Hitlers et al.  If that were not the case, how do we explain how the righteous in Christ share in the fate of the unrighteous?  What has become of the promises of God towards those that love him?

I am persuaded that there is no automatic pass to the second death as no one is automatically disqualified from the grace of God for just being born of Adam.  This obviously, is why Jesus came.  In fact, John 3:16 tells us that for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son so that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.  

God so loved Adam and his offspring that he gave them a second chance through his own beloved son (the second Adam), that none who love him should partake of the second death which shall come to the enemies of God and his Christ.  I understand “perish” to mean the second death because many before us who pleased God have already died the first death but we know shall never die the second death, making the promise true.

Thus, although Jesus saves to the utmost and could raise Lazarus and heal us of anything, it is obvious that the primary reason why he came is to save us from getting an automatic pass to the second death by giving us a very clear and real option to eternal life in himself, if we believe and follow him.

How does this relate to babies being born with sin?  They are surely born with sin.  If not, then how do we explain how a severely mentally challenged/handicapped/retarded individual (I do not mean it offensively but don't know what the politically acceptable word is) who has not mentally developed beyond infancy, physically matures and ages and dies?  Such an individual may be 50 and be as innocent as a 2 month old baby, yet he/she ages, sickens and dies.  How does Ezekiel 18:20 explain that then if different from the sin of Adam?

The first Adam got us into the first death, which is bad but not eternal.
The second Adam came to get us out of the second death, which is of an eternal nature.

[WhatIsTrue]

Get ready for another “semantic” post, Cubes.  

If I am hearing you correctly, you are saying:

We inherit “sin guilt” which causes our first death, and we are responsible for our own sins in the second death.

Is that correct?

If so, I would slightly disagree and state it this way:

We lost access to the tree of life because of Adam's sin, which causes the first death, but we can regain access to the tree of life through faithful obedience to YHWH and His Annointed.

“Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city.” – Revelations 22:4

Semantic?  Possibly.  But, I take Ezekiel 18 literally.  In YHWH's eyes, I am responsible for my own sin and no one else's.  “Inherited sin” sounds to me like we are not truly responsible for the sin in our lives.

Make sense?

[Cubes]

Hey WIT!

I think we are saying the same thing for the most part, but I feel the semantics in there somewhere!

Quote

Semantic? Possibly. But, I take Ezekiel 18 literally. In YHWH's eyes, I am responsible for my own sin and no one else's. “Inherited sin” sounds to me like we are not truly responsible for the sin in our lives. Make sense?

As relates to the second death or eternal life, I agree with your Ezekiel 18 interpretation (that each of us is responsible for his own sin though we also know that we are each saved by grace and not by our own works). However that premise does not explain why the righteous in Christ yet die in the first death, if you discount the inherited sin/guilt/death/loss of access to the tree of life explanation.

[Cubes]

1 Cor 15:20 But the fact is that Christ has been raised from the dead. He has become the first of a great harvest of those who will be raised to life again.
21 So you see, just as death came into the world through a man, Adam, now the resurrection from the dead has begun through another man, Christ. 22 Everyone dies because all of us are related to Adam, the first man. But all who are related to Christ, the other man, will be given new life. 23 But there is an order to this resurrection: Christ was raised first; then when Christ comes back, all his people will be raised..

It seems to me that in Adam, all living are dead men walking from the womb.  Marked and tagged until manifestation of death on the day each person dies.  This comes because of our genetic relation to Adam.

Then through genetic, holy spirit relation to Christ as our brother, the children of God though have been dead men walking from Adam, also have passed from death into eternal life.  Something that shall be fully manifested in time and eternity, thanks be to our merciful God.

[OneoftheLordsGenerals]

All have sin when they are born. Yet God in his compassion and mercy judges fairly. Would you condemn a child of 4 years old for not listening to what you say. If you tell them to clean their room at age 6 and they do not, would you turn your back on them and send them away. No of course not. Then how much more compassion would God have for them. God is love. God knows the heart and knows if one is truly accepting Jesus or denying him. When he knows that we have truly come into that age of accountability(the time in which he searches our heart and knows when we are ready to be held accountable for our sins, when we are able to accept or deny Christ), he will then hold us accountable for our sin(s). He is the judge, and He alone.

[david]

Children may inherit diseases or defects from their parents. This can be so with hemophilia, thalassemia (Mediterranean anemia), coronary artery disease, one type of diabetes, and even breast cancer.
The children are not personally at fault, yet they may suffer as a result of what they have inherited.

What about Ezekiel 18:20?

Consider David and Bath-sheba. Both were married persons when they committed adultery and she became pregnant. Their adultery was a grave sin punishable by death under God’s law. (2 Samuel 11:1-5; Deuteronomy 5:18; 22:22) So if God had permitted them to be dealt with by humans under the Law, the son developing in her womb would have died with its mother. But Jehovah chose to handle their case differently, which “the Judge of all the earth” certainly had a right to do.—Genesis 18:25.
When confronted with his guilt, David acknowledged: “I have sinned against Jehovah.” Then God’s spokesman told David: “Jehovah, in turn, does let your sin pass by. You will not die.” (2 Samuel 12:13) David was shown mercy because of the Kingdom covenant. Moreover, since God is able to read hearts, he must have evaluated the genuineness of David’s repentance and concluded that there was a basis for extending mercy to David and Bath-sheba. Yet they would not escape all the deserts of their error. They were told:
“Notwithstanding this, because you have unquestionably treated Jehovah with disrespect by this thing, also the son himself, just born to you, will positively die.”—2 Samuel 12:14.

God ‘dealt a blow’ involving their child to whom they were not entitled; the boy became sick and died. A person today might tend to focus on the child’s death and feel that a harsh judgment was executed. However, it is good to bear in mind that had the adultery been handled by and proved before human judges under the Law, all three (David, Bath-sheba, and the son in her womb) would have lost their lives. Viewed in that light, God’s permitting two of them to survive was merciful. Furthermore, at this late date we do not have all the facts, such as information about the health of the infant immediately after birth. We can, nonetheless, accept God’s handling of the matter, confident that what he did was impartial, wise, and righteous. Even David later acknowledged: “As for the true God, perfect is his way.”—2 Samuel 22:31; compare Job 34:12; Isaiah 55:11.
That is consistent with David’s reaction after he heard God’s judgment. While the child was sick, David grieved and fasted. But once death occurred, David appreciated that the matter had ended. (2 Samuel 12:22, 23) So, trusting God’s judgment, David proceeded to comfort Bath-sheba (now his legal wife), assuring her that their marriage relationship would continue. Later Solomon was born to them and became David’s successor.
God’s handling of that case need not be viewed as conflicting with Deuteronomy 24:16 or Ezekiel 18:20.
As part of the Law, God directed:“Fathers should not be put to death on account of children, and children should not be put to death on account of fathers. Each one should be put to death for his own sin.” (Deuteronomy 24:16) Those guidelines were for Israelite judges handling legal cases.
The judges could not read hearts. They were to deal with each man on the basis of his own conduct as established by the facts.
Similarly, Ezekiel 18:20 observes: “A son himself will bear nothing because of the error of the father, and a father himself will bear nothing because of the error of the son. Upon his own self the very righteousness of the righteous one will come to be, and upon his own self the very wickedness of a wicked one will come to be.”
This was primarily referring to adults. The context speaks of a son who witnessed his father’s wickedness but refused to share in it; instead, the son carried out Jehovah’s judicial decisions and walked in His statutes. Such a son would be preserved when his father died.—Ezekiel 18:14-17.

It is undeniable, though, that children can suffer consequences because of their parents’ actions. Parents who are wasteful or foolish may bring poverty on the whole family. Or imagine the effect on children if a parent is sentenced to prison for criminal activity. Even calamities that God justly brought on Israel for their wickedness affected the children of the time. (Deuteronomy 28:15, 20-32; Ezekiel 8:6-18; 9:5-10) Conversely, God urged his people: “You must choose life in order that you may keep alive, you and your offspring, by loving Jehovah your God, by listening to his voice and by sticking to him; for he is your life and the length of your days.”—Deuteronomy 30:19, 20.

[david]

Quote

David, You wrote: Quote Quote We are born with sin which is why a newborn baby may die having not necessarily “sinned.” The wages of sin is death. Death should have no effect on anyone if he/she is truly without sin. I think the above is a good point by Cubes. You are right. I did fail to address this point. Think about this: Yahshua was without sin, and he died. Death had an effect on him, despite the fact that he was without sin.

Yes, but had he not been put on a torture stake, would he have died of old age? I don't believe that a perfect person without sin (such as Adam before sinning and becoming imperfect) would keep living if you cut their head off. But, such a person without sin would not get sick and die of their body wearing out. Death and sin are related–sin leads to death, but that doesn't have to mean that the only way something dies is if it sins, necessarily. Animals die. Do they sin? And of course Jesus was perfect, without sin, and he died, as he had to. But he wouldn't have died of old age. Adam, had he not sinned, had his eyes not been opened to good and bad, and had Jehovah granted him the right to eat of the tree of life, symbolizing the gift of everlasting life, he wouldn't have died of old age or sickness. It is sin that brought these things about.

david.

[david]

Quote

David, You wrote: Quote WhatIsTrue, please answer the following based on what you know from experience or from books or whereever: 1. Could a child conceived in this way by an imperfect woman be perfect and free from sin in his physical organism? 2. How do the laws of heredity work when there is a union of perfection with imperfection? The book I appeal to is scripture. Ezekiel 18 renders your first question irrelevant. No one is born “with sin in his physical organism”. We are each responsible for our own sin. Your second question sounds like the kind of question a Greek philosopher would ask. I don't think that scripture addresses the “laws of heredity” between perfect and imperfect, so I haven't a clue as to the answer. Common sense says, though, that if you mix something perfect with something imperfect, you get something imperfect.

WhatIstrue,
With regard to my question sounding like something a greek philosopher would ask, I ask it because you seem to speak so authoritatively, and yet can't answer this question. How do you know what happens when God intervenes? When God overshadows with holy spirit? On what do you base your beliefs? The questions I asked you can't answer, and yet you claim the answers are common sense, and insert your own thinking.

[WhatIsTrue]

David,

You wrote:

Quote

It is undeniable, though, that children can suffer consequences because of their parents’ actions.

I agree.  Sin has consequences.  Cain killed Abel.  Abel was innocent of the crime but he suffered the consequences.  Suffering the consequences of sin and being guilty of sin are two different things.  (e.g. Yahshua on the tree.)

You wrote:

Quote

Yes, but had he not been put on a torture stake, would he have died of old age?  I don't believe that a perfect person without sin (such as Adam before sinning and becoming imperfect) would keep living if you cut their head off.  But, such a person without sin would not get sick and die of their body wearing out.

Interesting speculation.  I don't see any scripture to back it up.  I have seen elsewhere that you don't believe in the immortal soul doctrine.  Why do you seem to think that man himself is inherently immortal absent sin?  As far as I can see, scripture teaches that the tree of life is a reward not an inherent part of manhood.

“…And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever…” – Genesis 3:22

“…this mortal must put on immortality.” – 1 Corinthians 15:53

You wrote:

Quote

With regard to my question sounding like something a greek philosopher would ask, I ask it because you seem to speak so authoritatively, and yet can't answer this question.  How do you know what happens when God intervenes?  When God overshadows with holy spirit?  On what do you base your beliefs?  The questions I asked you can't answer, and yet you claim the answers are common sense, and insert your own thinking.

Fallacy number … nevermind.  

I'll just quote myself on this:

Quote

I don't think that scripture addresses the “laws of heredity” between perfect and imperfect, so I haven't a clue as to the answer.

Forgive me for adding a personal guess the last time I answered this.  If you have a scriptural answer to the question, I would sure like to see it.

As for your original explanation, Yahshua was not the first child to be produced by divine intervention.  Issac was, (Genesis 21:1-2).  Samuel and his brothers were, (1 Samuel 2:21).  And, so was John the Baptist: “… He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb, (Luke 1:15).”  So your “protective wall” theory is a little weak.

[david]

“Holy spirit will come upon you, and POWER OF THE MOST HIGH WILL OVERSHADOW YOU. For that REASON also what is born will be called HOLY, God’s Son. (Luke 1:35)

It seems that Jesus birth was quite different from others–he was born “holy.”

Jesus (I believe from conception onward) was truly “UNDEFILED, SEPARATED FROM SINNERS.”—Hebrews 7:26; 10:5.

“When [Jesus] comes into the world he says: ‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me.” (Heb 10:5-7)

Jesus came with a body prepared by his heavenly Father, one that corresponded in every respect to the one God prepared when He created Adam. (Genesis 2:7; Luke 1:35; 1 Corinthians 15:22, 45)

1 CORINTHIANS 15:22
“For just as in Adam all are dying, so also in the Christ all will be made alive.”
1 CORINTHIANS 15:45
“It is even so written: “The first man Adam became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.”

So we are agreed–You don't know what happens when Jehovah intervenes and you can't know if Jesus was born with sin, or wasn't.

WhatisTrue, a couple pages ago, you said:
“If we are born with 'sin by inheritance,' so is Yahshua.”

But now you say:

Quote

Forgive me for adding a personal guess the last time I answered this. If you have a scriptural answer to the question, I would sure like to see it.

Is your “guess” that if Jehovah prepares a body for Jesus, it is not pefect, that he is not separated from sinners in any way.
My point I don't believe your: 'if we are born with sin by inheritance, so is Jesus,' idea can't be shown true.

What is True,
I'm wondering what your responce is to my post about your Ezekiel 18:20.

[TJStarfire]

The part of His Spirit that God gave to Adam and Eve
when He breathed the breath of life into them was corrupted
by taking on the knowledge of good and Evil.
Since we are their descendants and since when humans conceive
their spirits divide and/or combine to spark the life of another spirit anchored to flesh.
Corrupted spirits produce corrupted spirits and so sin is carried
from generation to generation. We are all children of God,
everyone of us is OF His Spirit.

Gensis 6
And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh,
wherein is the breath of life,
from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

[Sultan]

Quote (TJStarfire @ Mar. 03 2006,01:43)

The part of His Spirit that God gave to Adam and Eve when He breathed the breath of life into them was corrupted by taking on the knowledge of good and Evil. Since we are their descendants and since when humans conceive their spirits divide and/or combine to spark the life of another spirit anchored to flesh. Corrupted spirits produce corrupted spirits and so sin is carried from generation to generation. We are all children of God, everyone of us is OF His Spirit. Gensis 6 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.

I noticed that you speak alot about the spirit, but what about the soul. Is it not the soul of man where his thoughts,decisions,etc. are made? The spirit is spoken of as the breath of life, and this breathe made the soul alive.

And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. (Gen. 2:7)

What scriptures can you give to support your claims of corrupted spirits? The scriptures you quoted do not speak of corrupted spirits. Rather they speak of the breath of life.

Also you stated:

Quote

We are all children of God, everyone of us is OF His Spirit.

Yet the Bible states that some are the children of God and others are children of the devil.

Jesus answered them, “Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?” (John. 6:70)

You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. (John. 8:44)

In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.(1 John 3:10)

[TJStarfire]

Quote

I noticed that you speak alot about the spirit, but what about the soul. Is it not the soul of man where his thoughts,decisions,etc. are made? The spirit is spoken of as the breath of life, and this breathe  made the soul alive.

I believe that those are just two words used to describe the same thing.
It is our Mind that controls our thoughts, decicions, etc…  
I believe that Our mind that is the bridge between the flesh and the spirit
Or rather that the mind is of the spirit but is anchored to the flesh
and it can reside in either realm, as we choose.

Isaiah 38:17
Indeed it was for my own peace That I had great bitterness;
But You have lovingly delivered my soul from the pit of corruption,
For You have cast all my sins behind Your back.

1 Corinthians 15:50
Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.

2 Peter 2:19
While they promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome,
by him also he is brought into bondage.

Galatians 6:8
For he who sows to his flesh will of the flesh reap corruption,
but he who sows to the Spirit will of the Spirit reap everlasting life.

Quote

Yet the Bible states that some are the children of God and others are children of the devil.

Well, maybe I should not have used the word children there, that seems to denote which influence
a person chooses to follow.
What I meant is that we are all sired by God.

Be well brother
TJ

[WhatIsTrue]

David,

Either I have not been clear about my position, or you are misunderstanding, (or misrepresenting), my argument.  Let me be clear:

I do not believe that anyone is born with sin.  We are each responsible for our own sins.  We do not inherit guilt from our fathers.

Having said that, let's look at your last post.

You wrote:

Quote

It seems that Jesus birth was quite different from others–he was born “holy.”

I agree that Yahshua's birth was unique.  He wa annointed with the Holy Spirit from birth for the purpose of fulfilling YHWH's longheld plan for mankind.  No one else was annointed for this task.

You wrote:

Quote

So we are agreed–You don't know what happens when Jehovah intervenes and you can't know if Jesus was born with sin, or wasn't.

No, we don't agree.   Ezekiel 18:20 makes it exceptionally clear that neither Yahshua, nor anyone else, was born with sin.

You wrote:

Quote

My point I don't believe your: 'if we are born with sin by inheritance, so is Jesus,' idea can't be shown true.

Then you need to explain your position on how a baby “inherits sin” solely because he/she is related to Adam, but Yahshua does not “inherit sin” even though he too is related to Adam.  Either guilt by genetic association is true or it isn't.  I say it isn't, but you say it is.

You wrote:

Quote

What is True, I'm wondering what your responce is to my post about your Ezekiel 18:20.

Perhaps my brief reply went unnoticed, but I did respond to that post.

I wrote the following:

Quote

I agree.  Sin has consequences.  Cain killed Abel.  Abel was innocent of the crime but he suffered the consequences.  Suffering the consequences of sin and being guilty of sin are two different things.  (e.g. Yahshua on the tree.)

In other words, your post had nothing to do with the question at hand.  Was David's child guilty of adultery, or did he simply suffer the consequnces for it?  I don't believe that when that child stands before the judgment seat he will be asked to account for David's adultery.  Do you?  The consequences for sin come upon the just and the unjust alike, but that has nothing to do with “inherited sin”.

“…He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.”  Matthew 5:45

[Sultan]

Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Mar. 04 2006,11:33)

David, Either I have not been clear about my position, or you are misunderstanding, (or misrepresenting), my argument. Let me be clear: I do not believe that anyone is born with sin. We are each responsible for our own sins. We do not inherit guilt from our fathers. Having said that, let's look at your last post. You wrote: Quote It seems that Jesus birth was quite different from others–he was born “holy.” I agree that Yahshua's birth was unique. He wa annointed with the Holy Spirit from birth for the purpose of fulfilling YHWH's longheld plan for mankind. No one else was annointed for this task. You wrote: Quote So we are agreed–You don't know what happens when Jehovah intervenes and you can't know if Jesus was born with sin, or wasn't. No, we don't agree. Ezekiel 18:20 makes it exceptionally clear that neither Yahshua, nor anyone else, was born with sin. You wrote: Quote My point I don't believe your: 'if we are born with sin by inheritance, so is Jesus,' idea can't be shown true. Then you need to explain your position on how a baby “inherits sin” solely because he/she is related to Adam, but Yahshua does not “inherit sin” even though he too is related to Adam. Either guilt by genetic association is true or it isn't. I say it isn't, but you say it is. You wrote: Quote What is True, I'm wondering what your responce is to my post about your Ezekiel 18:20. Perhaps my brief reply went unnoticed, but I did respond to that post. I wrote the following: Quote I agree. Sin has consequences. Cain killed Abel. Abel was innocent of the crime but he suffered the consequences. Suffering the consequences of sin and being guilty of sin are two different things. (e.g. Yahshua on the tree.) In other words, your post had nothing to do with the question at hand. Was David's child guilty of adultery, or did he simply suffer the consequnces for it? I don't believe that when that child stands before the judgment seat he will be asked to account for David's adultery. Do you? The consequences for sin come upon the just and the unjust alike, but that has nothing to do with “inherited sin”. “…He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust.” Matthew 5:45

Quote

I agree that Yahshua's birth was unique. He wa annointed with the Holy Spirit from birth for the purpose of fulfilling YHWH's longheld plan for mankind. No one else was annointed for this task.

Herein lies error #1. Jesus was not just anointed with the Holy Spirit, but He was conceived by the Spirit. Yahweh is not Jesus' Father by title, but by very conception. This is a point you seem to undermind, and ignore, but it makes Jesus the “Only Begotten Son” literally.

But while he thought about these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take to you Mary your wife, for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit. (Matt. 1:20)

Quote

Then you need to explain your position on how a baby “inherits sin” solely because he/she is related to Adam, but Yahshua does not “inherit sin” even though he too is related to Adam. Either guilt by genetic association is true or it isn't. I say it isn't, but you say it is.

The baby inherits sin from it's father. The sin nature is passed down from the father. The bloodline is passed down from the father. Jesus had an earthly mother, but the sin nature is not passed down from the woman. If it were then the scriptures would read “through one man and woman sin entered the world (Rom 5:12)”, but it does not.

Jesus' Father was Yahweh therefore Jesus was not born with a sin nature. That is the signifigance of the virgin birth. Please give me the scripture that says Jesus is related to Adam. This is not a true statement in the context that you are using it. Jesus is not related to Adam in the same way we are because God was His Father, and not Adam.

YOU CONTINUE TO DEFINE SIN AS SOMETHING WE DO. Here is another scriptual definition for sin:

16 If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. 17 But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. 19 For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. 20 Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. (Romans. 7:16-20)

Notice twice in the text, sin is not described as something that is done, but as something that dwells inside. That is the sin nature. It is what causes the desire to sin. Desire comes from within and not from without. Sin (transgression of the law) is the outward manifestation of the desires on the inside. These desires come from the sin nature.

But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death. (James 1:14-15)

It is the sin nature that causes the desire, and the desire causes sin, and sin causes death. This is why we have to teach children to tell the truth because lying come natural. We have to teach children to share because selfishness comes natural.

[david]

WhatIsTrue, you cling to Ez 18:20 as strong proof of what you say. Yet you dismiss the following post as not applying somehow. I fail to understand you you can claim what you are about Ezekiel and dismiss the following:

Quote

Children may inherit diseases or defects from their parents. This can be so with hemophilia, thalassemia (Mediterranean anemia), coronary artery disease, one type of diabetes, and even breast cancer. The children are not personally at fault, yet they may suffer as a result of what they have inherited. What about Ezekiel 18:20? Consider David and Bath-sheba. Both were married persons when they committed adultery and she became pregnant. Their adultery was a grave sin punishable by death under God’s law. (2 Samuel 11:1-5; Deuteronomy 5:18; 22:22) So if God had permitted them to be dealt with by humans under the Law, the son developing in her womb would have died with its mother. But Jehovah chose to handle their case differently, which “the Judge of all the earth” certainly had a right to do.—Genesis 18:25. When confronted with his guilt, David acknowledged: “I have sinned against Jehovah.” Then God’s spokesman told David: “Jehovah, in turn, does let your sin pass by. You will not die.” (2 Samuel 12:13) David was shown mercy because of the Kingdom covenant. Moreover, since God is able to read hearts, he must have evaluated the genuineness of David’s repentance and concluded that there was a basis for extending mercy to David and Bath-sheba. Yet they would not escape all the deserts of their error. They were told: “Notwithstanding this, because you have unquestionably treated Jehovah with disrespect by this thing, also the son himself, just born to you, will positively die.”—2 Samuel 12:14. God ‘dealt a blow’ involving their child to whom they were not entitled; the boy became sick and died. A person today might tend to focus on the child’s death and feel that a harsh judgment was executed. However, it is good to bear in mind that had the adultery been handled by and proved before human judges under the Law, all three (David, Bath-sheba, and the son in her womb) would have lost their lives. Viewed in that light, God’s permitting two of them to survive was merciful. Furthermore, at this late date we do not have all the facts, such as information about the health of the infant immediately after birth. We can, nonetheless, accept God’s handling of the matter, confident that what he did was impartial, wise, and righteous. Even David later acknowledged: “As for the true God, perfect is his way.”—2 Samuel 22:31; compare Job 34:12; Isaiah 55:11. That is consistent with David’s reaction after he heard God’s judgment. While the child was sick, David grieved and fasted. But once death occurred, David appreciated that the matter had ended. (2 Samuel 12:22, 23) So, trusting God’s judgment, David proceeded to comfort Bath-sheba (now his legal wife), assuring her that their marriage relationship would continue. Later Solomon was born to them and became David’s successor. God’s handling of that case need not be viewed as conflicting with Deuteronomy 24:16 or Ezekiel 18:20. As part of the Law, God directed:“Fathers should not be put to death on account of children, and children should not be put to death on account of fathers. Each one should be put to death for his own sin.” (Deuteronomy 24:16) Those guidelines were for Israelite judges handling legal cases. The judges could not read hearts. They were to deal with each man on the basis of his own conduct as established by the facts. Similarly, Ezekiel 18:20 observes: “A son himself will bear nothing because of the error of the father, and a father himself will bear nothing because of the error of the son. Upon his own self the very righteousness of the righteous one will come to be, and upon his own self the very wickedness of a wicked one will come to be.” This was primarily referring to adults. The context speaks of a son who witnessed his father’s wickedness but refused to share in it; instead, the son carried out Jehovah’s judicial decisions and walked in His statutes. Such a son would be preserved when his father died.—Ezekiel 18:14-17. It is undeniable, though, that children can suffer consequences because of their parents’ actions. Parents who are wasteful or foolish may bring poverty on the whole family. Or imagine the effect on children if a parent is sentenced to prison for criminal activity. Even calamities that God justly brought on Israel for their wickedness affected the children of the time. (Deuteronomy 28:15, 20-32; Ezekiel 8:6-18; 9:5-10) Conversely, God urged his people: “You must choose life in order that you may keep alive, you and your offspring, by loving Jehovah your God, by listening to his voice and by sticking to him; for he is your life and the length of your days.”—Deuteronomy 30:19, 20.

Also, you say:

Quote

I do not believe that anyone is born with sin. We are each responsible for our own sins. We do not inherit guilt from our fathers.

Maybe guilt is a word that is confusing us. Sin essentially means “missing the mark,” of God’s standards.
If we were born imperfect, and thus miss the mark of perfection without actually being guilty of a specific sin (missing the mark) other than to be born pefect, we still have sin (are imperfect and miss the mark of perfection).
If an employer is interviewing people for a job, a possible employee could miss the mark of what the employer wants without actually being guilty of anything. “Guilt” and not achieving God's standards of perfection are not the same thing.

david.

[Author]

Posts