- This topic is empty.
- Posts
Quote 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? Whatistrue,
MY POINT EXACTLY. The child was not guilty of adultery, yet he suffered the consequences of it. How does this compare with your understanding of Ezekiel 18:20, which I believe you have misapplied?I already wrote:
“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.”EZ 18:20
“A son himself will bear nothing because of the error of the father,”–we have to understand what these words are for–otherwise they would certainly contradict certain other parts of the Bible, such as I have mentioned.God's spirit Son “became flesh and resided among us.” (John 1:14)
In order to accomplish this change in Jesus' nature, God miraculously transferred Jesus' life from heaven into the womb of the vigin girl Mary. In that way Jesus remarried God's Son, even though a human. Furthermore, since God, not any man, gave Jesus life, Jesus was born perfect, without sin. “What is born will be called holy, God's Son,” said the angel Gabriel to Mary. He was “undefiled, separated from sinners.” (Luke 1:35, Heb 7:26)Hi Sultan
I do believe you are right.
Quote 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.
Galatians 5
This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.
But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, ravelings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.Romans 6
Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.Matthew 5
But I say unto you, That whosoever looks on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.Giving into the lusts of our earthly body is SIN
There was no sin in the first man, no evil or suffering in his life, when he was created.
Being God’s creation, they were sinless, or perfect. (Genesis 1:31; Deuteronomy 32:4)
By choosing to obey, Adam and his wife, Eve, could bring praise and honor to their Creator and remain free of sin. On the other hand, an act of disobedience would indicate their failure to meet God’s perfect standards and would make them imperfect—sinful.
By choosing to disobey God, our first parents missed the mark of perfection and made sinners of themselves.
The Bible explains: “Through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned.” (Romans 5:12)The law of heredity was already in effect. Adam could not pass on to his children what he did not have.
JOB 14:4
“Who can produce someone clean out of someone unclean? There is not one.”Having lost perfection, the first couple were sinners when their children were conceived. As a result, all of us—without exception—have inherited sin. (Psalm 51:5; Romans 3:23) In turn, sin has produced nothing but evil and suffering. Moreover, because of it, we all grow old and die, “for the wages sin pays is death.”—Romans 6:23
Paul was well aware of his sinful tendencies.
“When I wish to do what is right, what is bad is present with me,” he admitted.
“I really delight in the law of God according to the man I am within, but I behold in my members another law warring against the law of my mind and leading me captive to sin’s law THAT IS IN MY MEMBERS.”
So Paul asked: “Who will rescue me from the body undergoing this death?”—Romans 7:21-24.In the book of Romans, the inspired apostle Paul explains this in graphic terms: We are “UNDER SIN,” as soldiers are under their commander (Romans 3:9); it has “RULED” over mankind like a king (Romans 5:21); it “RESIDES,” or is “DWELLING,” within us (Romans 7:17, 20); its “LAW” is continually at work in us, in effect trying to control our course. (Romans 7:23, 25) What a difficult battle we have to resist sin’s powerful hold on our fallen flesh!—Romans 7:21, 24.
Because we have inherited imperfect, EVERYONE is a sinner. Try as you might to not be a sinner, you can’t. You are a sinner, imperfect. You miss the mark of perfection. Adam could not pass on what he did not have. And he did not have perfection. He was deficient.
PSALM 51:5
“Look! With error I was brought forth with birth pains, And in sin my mother conceived me.”PSALM 130:3
“If errors were what you watch, O Jah, O Jehovah, who could stand?”PSALM 143:2
“And do not enter into judgment with your servant; For before you no one alive can be righteous.”1 KINGS 8:46
““In case they sin against you (for there is no man that does not sin),PROVERBS 20:9
“Who can say: “I have cleansed my heart; I have become pure from my sin”?”ECCLESIASTES 7:20
“For there is no man righteous in the earth that keeps doing good and does not sin.”ISAIAH 53:6
“Like sheep we have all of us wandered about; it was each one to his own way that we have turned; and Jehovah himself has caused the error of us all to meet up with that one.”ROMANS 3:23
“For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,”GALATIANS 3:22
“But the Scripture delivered up all things together to the custody of sin, that the promise resulting from faith toward Jesus Christ might be given to those exercising faith.”1 JOHN 1:8
“If we make the statement: “We have no sin,” we are misleading ourselves and the truth is not in us.”WhatIsTrue, we are born this way (with sin's law in our members), and are therefore imperfect and sinful regardless of whether we are actually sinning (missing the mark) in some specific way. We are born with sin (imperfection; we miss the mark of perfection) not because we are practicing sin as babies, but because of the answer to Job's question:
“Who can produce someone clean out of someone unclean?”
“Who can produce someone clean out of someone unclean?”
I have just read ramblinrose's link that talks about this scripture in Job. It states that this is not really what this scripture is directly speaking about, and that if we apply it thus, we must take it to mean that Jesus also has inherited sin.However, Ramblinrose, while it may not have been discussing this exact thing, the priniciple (basic truth) behind it does apply. It states a basic truth.
“Who can produce someone clean out of someone unclean?” No one. No one except Jehovah the ALMIGHTY, that is. Do not limit him. When his hand is in the matter, things are obviously quite different. It was Jehovah that transferred the life of his son to Mary's womb–it was obviously not a normal pregnancy. Perhaps this conception does not apply to whatever restrictions you place upon it.david.
David and Sultan,
I think that we are beginning to go in circles here, and I am not sure how productive this discussion is at this point. But, I will try to clarify my position again in the hopes that we can reach a reasonable conclusion. Cubes and I came to the conclusion that we would just have to disagree. We may need to do the same.
Sultan wrote:
Quote 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.
I believe that this is the heart of our discussion. How you define sin affects how you view the original question posted in this discussion thread. Every other point in this debate hinges on this definition. So, if we can not come to an agreement here, we are at an impassable stalemate.
I have taken the simple definition given in 1 John 3:4, “…sin is the transgression of the law.” Both of you have taken a couple of the more advanced passages in scripture and tried to get your definition of sin from them. Why do I say that those passages are adavanced? Ask Peter:
“…as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction… .” – 1 Peter 3:15-16
Paul's writings are not for “babes” in the faith. They are advanced and require that the reader already understand the basic principles found in scripture. Yet, this is the place where you are trying to find a basic definition for sin. (You both referenced Romans 7.) Well, I suggest that we all turn aside from the epistles and get our definition of sin from Messiah's teachings first. Messiah Yahshua says:
“Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.” – John 8:34
Does “sin” in this context sound like something you do or something with which you are born? Is Messiah saying that we commit sin because we are slaves to sin, or is he saying that our actions show us who we truly serve?
Let's look at another saying. Messiah Yahshua taught us to pray, (in part):
“…And forgive us our sins, For we also forgive everyone who is indebted to us. …” – Luke 11:4
Does “sin” in this context sound like something we do or something that is simply a part of us?
If you read all of the gospels, you will find Messiah Yahshua referring to sin in this same way over and over again, as something that we do. You will not once hear him refer to “inherited sin”. In fact, when the disciples ask him a question as to whether a child was born blind due to “inherited sin”, he refutes the possibility:
“'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?'
Jesus answered, 'Neither this man nor his parents sinned … .'” – John 9:2-3That settles the issue for me. If Messiah Yahshua does not believe in “inherited sin”, then I don't think that I will either. You may choose to try and learn about sin from Paul instead, but I would remind you again of Peter's warning about Paul's “difficult” writings.
Food for thought:
“Inherited sin” basically says that I am not responsible for being a sinner. It's all Adam's fault. Does that sound like godly wisdom or a satanic deception?
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Mar. 06 2006,17:47) David and Sultan, I think that we are beginning to go in circles here, and I am not sure how productive this discussion is at this point. But, I will try to clarify my position again in the hopes that we can reach a reasonable conclusion. Cubes and I came to the conclusion that we would just have to disagree. We may need to do the same.
Sultan wrote:
Quote 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.
I believe that this is the heart of our discussion. How you define sin affects how you view the original question posted in this discussion thread. Every other point in this debate hinges on this definition. So, if we can not come to an agreement here, we are at an impassable stalemate.
I have taken the simple definition given in 1 John 3:4, “…sin is the transgression of the law.” Both of you have taken a couple of the more advanced passages in scripture and tried to get your definition of sin from them. Why do I say that those passages are adavanced? Ask Peter:
“…as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction… .” – 1 Peter 3:15-16
Paul's writings are not for “babes” in the faith. They are advanced and require that the reader already understand the basic principles found in scripture. Yet, this is the place where you are trying to find a basic definition for sin. (You both referenced Romans 7.) Well, I suggest that we all turn aside from the epistles and get our definition of sin from Messiah's teachings first. Messiah Yahshua says:
“Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin.” – John 8:34
Does “sin” in this context sound like something you do or something with which you are born? Is Messiah saying that we commit sin because we are slaves to sin, or is he saying that our actions show us who we truly serve?
Let's look at another saying. Messiah Yahshua taught us to pray, (in part):
“…And forgive us our sins, For we also forgive everyone who is indebted to us. …” – Luke 11:4
Does “sin” in this context sound like something we do or something that is simply a part of us?
If you read all of the gospels, you will find Messiah Yahshua referring to sin in this same way over and over again, as something that we do. You will not once hear him refer to “inherited sin”. In fact, when the disciples ask him a question as to whether a child was born blind due to “inherited sin”, he refutes the possibility:
“'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?'
Jesus answered, 'Neither this man nor his parents sinned … .'” – John 9:2-3That settles the issue for me. If Messiah Yahshua does not believe in “inherited sin”, then I don't think that I will either. You may choose to try and learn about sin from Paul instead, but I would remind you again of Peter's warning about Paul's “difficult” writings.
Food for thought:
“Inherited sin” basically says that I am not responsible for being a sinner. It's all Adam's fault. Does that sound like godly wisdom or a satanic deception?
Whatistrue,
The Bible says that all scripture is inspired by God. (2Tim. 3:16). Nowhere in scripture are we told to pick and choose which parts we like. This discussion is not going in circles, I believe you are going in circles. I do not disagree with sin being defined as transgression against the law, but there are also other passages where this definition will not fit. Therefore it is your choice whether or not you are willing to go forward. You constantly want to stay with scriptures that support only one part of the equation. For example here is another scripture from Genesis:If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and its desire is for you, but you must master it.”(Genesis 4:7 NASB)
Here sin is pesonified, but here's another one.
For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it killed me. (Romans 7:11 NKJV)
The issue is not the text, or my growth; the issue is are you willing to allow the Bible to speak, and be willing to at least consider what is being said.
I understand that whenever we are challenged defences go up, but my goal is not to just post comments, I am considering all that you say, and examining the scriptures, and so far I still see texts that speak of sin as “transgression”, but also texts where that definition will not fit (such as Romans 7).
Quote That settles the issue for me. If Messiah Yahshua does not believe in “inherited sin”, then I don't think that I will either. You may choose to try and learn about sin from Paul instead, but I would remind you again of Peter's warning about Paul's “difficult” writings. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work. (2 Tim 3:16-17)
knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.(2 Pet. 1:20-21)
It is not Paul's word vs. Jesus. It is all God's Word.
I agree with Sultan. You can definitely show a lot of scriptures that speak of sin being a specific breaking of God's standards, for when you do that, you are definitely sinning (“missing,” or not reaching a goal, way, mark, or right point.)
But that is not what we are discussing. We all know those scriptures exist. But it's the sciptures that speak of sin differently that we believe suggests inherited sin that is at the heart of what we are considering.For example, has anyone mentioned this scripture?
ROMANS 5:19
“For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”The evidence I believe points to a passing on of sin from Adam to succeeding generations as a result of the recognized law of heredity. This is evidently what the psalmist refers to in saying: “With error I was brought forth with birth pains, and in sin my mother conceived me.” (Ps 51:5)
Sin, along with its consequences, entered and spread to all the human race not merely because Adam was the family head of the race but because he, not Eve, was its progenitor, or human life source. From him, as well as from Eve, his offspring would inescapably inherit not merely physical characteristics but also personality traits, including the inclination toward sin.—Compare 1Co 15:22, 48, 49.Paul’s words in Romans 5:19 also point to this conclusion when he says that “just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one person [Christ Jesus] many will be constituted righteous.” (Ro 5:19) Those to be “constituted righteous” by Christ’s obedience were not all immediately so constituted at the moment of his presenting his ransom sacrifice to God, but they progressively come under the benefits of that sacrifice as they come to exercise faith in that provision and become reconciled to God. (Joh 3:36; Ac 3:19) So, too, progressive generations of Adam’s descendants have been constituted sinners as they have been conceived by their innately sinful parents in Adam’s line.
Through Adam's disobedience, “many were constituted sinners.”
We must look at how sin is spoken of as a whole.
In the book of Romans, the inspired apostle Paul explains this in graphic terms: We are “UNDER SIN,” as soldiers are under their commander (Romans 3:9); it has “RULED” over mankind like a king (Romans 5:21); it “RESIDES,” or is “DWELLING,” within us (Romans 7:17, 20); its “LAW” is continually at work in us, in effect trying to control our course. (Romans 7:23, 25)
Sultan,
You have completely misunderstood, (and misrepresented), my position.
You wrote:
Quote It is not Paul's word vs. Jesus. It is all God's Word. Where did I ever say that it was “Paul versus Jesus”? Where did I say that we must pick and choose what parts of the word to believe? Let me clarify my position so that you don't mistake it again:
Not all scripture is easy to understand. (See the book of Revelation.) It is extremely important that one first learns the basics of scriptural understanding before trying to move on to more advanced topics. You can not start with Paul and interpret everything else through your understanding of his writings. You must start with the foundational truths of the Hebrew scriputures and Messiah's teachings and build on that rock.
Matthew 7:24-29:
Quote “Therefore whoever hears these sayings of Mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man who built his house on the rock: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it did not fall, for it was founded on the rock.
“But everyone who hears these sayings of Mine, and does not do them, will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand: and the rain descended, the floods came, and the winds blew and beat on that house; and it fell. And great was its fall.”
And so it was, when Jesus had ended these sayings, that the people were astonished at His teaching, for He taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.Whose teachings are we to build our understanding on?
Here's Peter's warning again:
“…as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction… .” – 1 Peter 3:15-16
All scripture given by inspiration of YHWH is good for teaching, but if you start with Revelation and work your way backwards, you are not going to understand the Word with much clarity. You must build your doctrine on the true foundation, which is Messiah. That is why I appealed to his words in my last post. You can not build your doctrinal foundation on any other without your “doctrinal house” falling down.
By the way, the two verses that you quoted make my point quite clearly. If you tried to build your understanding of what sin is by starting with those two verses, you would have the impression that sin is some kind of predatory being. But, if you understand first that sin is disobedience, you can recognize, and appreciate, the metaphor used in each passage.
(Paul uses a lot of metaphors in his writings. For example, do you think that he taught that we are literally the body of Messiah, or do recognize the metaphor as a representation of the heavenly kingdom, composed of Messiah, as its head, and we, his followers, as “the body”?)
With all that said, let's focus on one or two passages, (of your choosing), where you think “sin” can not mean “disobedience”. If we look closely, I am sure that we will find a metaphor of some kind is being used. If not, I will learn something beyond my current understanding. But, please give some thought to what I am saying here. I truly believe that the greatest contributor to unsound doctrine is an unwillingness to start at the foundation and work upwards. You can find a verse in the bible to say anything that you want, if you really try, but if you start with the basic truths of scripture, a lot of erroneous doctrines immediately melt away.
ROMANS 5:19
“For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”Quote Sultan, You have completely misunderstood, (and misrepresented), my position.
You wrote:
Quote
It is not Paul's word vs. Jesus. It is all God's Word.Where did I ever say that it was “Paul versus Jesus”? Where did I say that we must pick and choose what parts of the word to believe?
You didn't say it specifically, but I believe it's the opinion of some that you are ignoring certain scritpures, and only looking at the majority of scriptures which we all know speak of sin as acts of disobedience.
We don't need you to repeatedly show us these scriptures as we know they exist. It's the other scriptures that we believe speak of inherited sin which are in question. It is these we should be focusing on. Yes, many scriptures do speak of sin in the way you suggest and to disobey is certainly to sin, to miss God's standards. When Adam disobeyed, he certainly sinned. But it didn't affect only him.ROMANS 5:19
“For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”Through Adam's disobedience “many were constituted sinners.”
What I believe Sultan was saying is that it shouldn't be One scripture (Paul) verses One scripture (Jesus) but we must let all the scriptures define what sin is.
Whatistrue, you previous said:
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”.
I believe sin is heriditary, and that it is a part of our make up.
ROMANS 7:21-24
“I find, then, this law in my case: that when I wish to do what is right, what is bad is present with me. I really delight in the law of God according to the man I am within, but I behold in my members another law warring against the law of my mind and leading me captive to SIN'S LAW THAT IS IN MY MEMBERS. Miserable man that I am! Who will rescue me from the body undergoing this death?”“member”
1. A distinct part of a whole, especially:
1. Linguistics. A syntactic unit of a sentence; a clause.
2. Logic. A proposition of a syllogism.
3. Mathematics. An element in a set.
2. A part or an organ of a human or animal body, as:
1. A limb, such as an arm or a leg.
2. The penis.
3. A part of a plant.
4. One that belongs to a group or an organization: a club member; a bank that is a member of the FDIC.
5. Mathematics. The expression on either side of an equality sign.
6. A structural unit, such as a beam or wall.I believe the only definition that fits is 2–A part of a human body.
“Members” would be parts of the human body or the body as a whole.Sins “law” is in our members, our bodies.
That fallen flesh infected with sin is enslaved to “sin’s law.” Our bodies are under the law of sin.
This rule, or law of sin, working in imperfect flesh exercises power over it, making it incline toward violation of God’s law. (Ro 7:23; Ge 8:21)
GENESIS 8:21
“And Jehovah began to smell a restful odor, and so Jehovah said in his heart: “Never again shall I call down evil upon the ground on man’s account, because THE INCLINATION OF THE HEART OF MAN IS BAD FROM HIS YOUTH UP; and never again shall I deal every living thing a blow just as I have done.”Through Adam's disobedience “many were constituted sinners.” (Romans 5:19)
OK David, let's look at the verses you brought up. (I am going to quote them using a different translation than the one you are using, but in most cases, there isn't much of a difference.)
Passage #1:
Romans 5:19Quote For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. This verse says that in the same way that many were made sinners, many will be made righteous. Well, the question is: what is that way? You say that we are sinners because of our genetic relationship to Adam, but is that the same way that we will be made righteous, through a genetic relationship to Messiah? I say no. We are made righteous when we choose to follow Messiah, just like we were made sinners when we chose to follow Adam. In either case, our condition results from our actions. In other words:
Just as we will not be made righteous through passive inheritance, we were not made sinners through passive inheritance.
Passage #2:
Romans 7:13-25Quote Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 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. For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.
I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.I quoted the entire passage, and not just the verse that you emphasized, to show how complicated a thought Paul is trying to convey here. He concludes with, “So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.” Do you know what he means by that? Is he saying that the “sinful nature” is only in his physical body but not in his mind? Is the “sin in his members” to which he refers a metaphor for carnal desires, or is he trying to say that “inherited sin” only affects his body but not his mind? As far as I can tell, this passage has nothing to do with “inherited sin”. Given the context of the chapter, I believe that Paul is talking about the conflict between the desire to be obedient to YHWH and the desire to be obedient to our own carnal desires. That's what sin is: a question of obedience. Note what Paul says in verse 8 of this same chapter:
“… For apart from the law sin was dead.”
Sin is disobedience. Without law, there is no sin. That hardly sounds like something we “inherited”.
Passage #3:
Genesis 8:21Quote And the LORD smelled a soothing aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done. First of all, I noticed here that the passage says man's heart is evil from his youth – not his birth! – which harmonizes perfectly with the idea that YHWH does not view us as sinners until we reach an age where we can choose to follow after His ways or to reject them, (Isaiah 7:16). But putting that aside, let's look at the context for this verse. Two chapters earlier YHWH says this:
Genesis 6:5-8
Quote Then the [YHWH] saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the [YHWH] was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So the [YHWH] said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” But Noah found grace in the eyes of the [YHWH]. How is it that Noah found favor in YHWH's eyes? Let's read on:
Genesis 6:9
Quote … Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. Why would YHWH spare Noah if all men were born evil and couldn't help themselves from doing evil? It appears that unlike the rest of the earth, Noah actually sought after YHWH and was obedient to Him. He chose righteousness, and scripture calls him a “just” and “perfect” man because of it. According to your doctrine, Noah should have been evil like everyone else. All men do have inclinations towards disobedience from youth, but that does not make us sinners. We become sinners when we choose to act on that disobedient inclination.
So far, I haven't seen any passage that promotes that we are sinners from birth. If you have other verses, go ahead and share them if you like.
Quote Passage #1:
Romans 5:19
Quote
For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.This verse says that in the same way that many were made sinners, many will be made righteous. Well, the question is: what is that way? You say that we are sinners because of our genetic relationship to Adam, but is that the same way that we will be made righteous, through a genetic relationship to Messiah? I say no. We are made righteous when we choose to follow Messiah, just like we were made sinners when we chose to follow Adam. In either case, our condition results from our actions. In other words:
Just as we will not be made righteous through passive inheritance, we were not made sinners through passive inheritance.
But that's not what it says.
'So by Christ's obedience [sacrificial death] many will be constituted righteous,'
so by Adam's disobedience “many were made sinners.”The point of that scripture, if you read it again, looking at the preceeding verse:
ROMANS 5:18
“So, then, as through one trespass the result to men of all sorts was condemnation, likewise also through one act of justification the result to men of all sorts is a declaring of them righteous for life.”We were all condemned because of Adam's sin.
ROMANS 5:19
“For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”We were constituted sinners through the disobedience of one man.
God's justice required that the ransom sacrifice be equal–a perfect man sinned and so a perfect man would have to give up his life as a ransom sacrifice.
Quote This verse says that in the same way that many were made sinners, many will be made righteous. Well, the question is: what is that way?
Yes, that is the question. And you answered it wrongly.
It doesn't really say: 'In the SAME WAY that many were made sinners…'
Read it again. It is comparing two things: The perfect life of Jesus, being sacrificed in accord with divine justice to pay for what Adam, the perfect man, lost.Despite how you re-phrase it, your Bible says:
For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.
The point is the effect that ONE MAN had on everyone else. Yes, ONE MAN can have an effect on you.
Quote We are made righteous when we choose to follow Messiah, just like we were made sinners when we chose to follow Adam. In either case, our condition results from our actions.
This verse is not speaking of my actions or yours. It's talking about two men, both perfect and what effect THEIR actions have had on us.
I repeat: THIS VERSE IS TALKING ABOUT TWO MEN, BOTH PERFECT AND WHAT EFFECT THEIR ACTIONS HAVE HAD ON US.
Re-phrase it as often as you like. Insert the words “in the same way” and italicize them. Then, try to reshape it to be about something it is not. Does any of this sound familiar?
Read that scripture again.
Read the verse before it. They are both quite clear.Moving on. (and I'd like to come back to the previous scripture.)
Quote Passage #2:
Romans 7:13-25
Quote
Has then what is good become death to me? Certainly not! But sin, that it might appear sin, was producing death in me through what is good, so that sin through the commandment might become exceedingly sinful. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. 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. For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.
I find then a law, that evil is present with me, the one who wills to do good. For I delight in the law of God according to the inward man. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.I quoted the entire passage, and not just the verse that you emphasized, to show how complicated a thought Paul is trying to convey here. He concludes with, “So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.” Do you know what he means by that? Is he saying that the “sinful nature” is only in his physical body but not in his mind? Is the “sin in his members” to which he refers a metaphor for carnal desires, or is he trying to say that “inherited sin” only affects his body but not his mind? As far as I can tell, this passage has nothing to do with “inherited sin”. Given the context of the chapter, I believe that Paul is talking about the conflict between the desire to be obedient to YHWH and the desire to be obedient to our own carnal desires.
Yes, Paul is talking about the conflict between what he knows is right (in his mind) and what his sinful desires are.
Quote But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. Quote He concludes with, “So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.”
So a person may know what is right, and always be wanting to not sin, but this is hard with “the law of sin” in your body. hmmm. The law of sin, in your members. It almost sounds as if this law or rule is written in the genetic code.
I would also like to discuss this scripture much more when I have time.Moving on:
Quote According to your doctrine, Noah should have been evil like everyone else.
I don't know how that's “my doctrine.” I've never used the word “evil” in this thread, have I?I shall say this one more time: If we look at the word sin, it is essentially a word that means to miss something. A variation
of that word is actually sometimes translated in English Bibles in certain passages as “miss.”The reason that it was God's Son that needed to be sacrificed as a ransom (equal payment) was that everyone else missed the mark. Adam was without sin, perfect, and because of Jesus special birth, not with a human father, he too was born without sin.
Since Jesus did not owe his life to any human father descended from the sinner Adam, and since God’s holy spirit ‘overshadowed’ Mary, evidently from the time she conceived until the time of Jesus’ birth, Jesus was born free from any inheritance of sin or imperfection, being, as it were, “an unblemished and spotless lamb,” whose blood could prove to be an acceptable sacrifice. (Lu 1:35; Joh 1:29; 1Pe 1:18, 19)
He maintained that sinless state throughout his life and thus did not disqualify himself. (Heb 4:15; 7:26; 1Pe 2:22) As a ‘sharer of blood and flesh,’ he was a near kinsman of mankind and he had the thing of value, his own perfect life maintained pure through tests of integrity, with which to repurchase mankind, emancipate them.—Heb 2:14, 15.
1 TIMOTHY 2:6
“who gave himself a corresponding ransom for all—[this is] what is to be witnessed to at its own particular times.”
His life corresponded to Adam.Sorry, back to Noah
Noah avoided the corruption surrounding him and is described by God’s Word as “a righteous man. He proved himself faultless among his contemporaries. Noah walked with the true God.” (Ge 6:8, 9) Noah could be spoken of as “faultless” because, unlike that ungodly world, he measured up fully to what God required of him. (Compare Gen 6:22)Besides Jehovah, perfection of any other person or thing, is relative, not absolute. (Compare Ps 119:96.) That is, a thing is “perfect” according to, or in relation to, the purpose or end for which it is appointed by its designer or producer, or the use to which it is to be put by its receiver or user.
The very meaning of perfection requires that there be someone who decides when “completion” has been reached, what the standards of excellence are, what requirements are to be satisfied, and what details are essential. Ultimately, God the Creator is the final Arbiter of perfection, the Standard-Setter, in accord with his own righteous purposes and interests.Quote
Why would YHWH spare Noah if all men were born evil and couldn't help themselves from doing evil?
The Bible says that all men sin. Noah's world had become extremely corrupt, and Jehovah decided to bring it to an end, with the exception of one exceptional man.
But you are stepping a step ahead and presuming that there is not inherited sin, which is what brings you to your conclusion.
One can inherit sin and still try to do what is right, despite the law of sin in our members. (Remember Paul's words?)Intersting:
Quote All men do have inclinations towards disobedience from youth, but that does not make us sinners.
Ok, so you admit that we have an inclination towards sinning from our youth, but you do not want to call that inclination inherited sin. Fine, we'll call it something else: “An inclination towards disobedience.”This is very interesting to me. I wonder what you believe this inclination towards sinning from youth up is all about?
To me, it sounds a lot like what I call “inherited sin.”
david
Where is Sultan when you need him? Do we not begin to go in circles here?
You presented me with three verses. I explained them one way. Now, you explain them another. Shall I re-explain them a different way from you again, or is it clear, (as I said in a previous post), that we will do nothing but go in circles if we try to approach the discussion this way?
Clearly, I disagree with your conclusions David. The question is, would you like for me to restate why, (perhaps with better explanation), or should we just agree to disagree on the intepretation of those verses for now? (This is not a rhetorical question. I can go either way.) I think that you are reading too much into those verses. You think that I am not reading enough out of them. How do we resolve that?
You wrote:
Quote Ok, so you admit that we have an inclination towards sinning from our youth, but you do not want to call that inclination inherited sin. Fine, we'll call it something else: “An inclination towards disobedience.” This is very interesting to me. I wonder what you believe this inclination towards sinning from youth up is all about?
To me, it sounds a lot like what I call “inherited sin.”
Ok, David, this is what it all comes down to I suppose. You equate human nature with “inherited sin”, whereas I see human nature as human nature, created in us by YHWH. Here's my proof:
Adam sinned.
Where did Adam get the inclination to do his own will rather than YHWH's? Was it some “inherited sin nature” working in his members? Was he forced by the Adversary, against his own “perfect” nature, to disobey YHWH? I say no.
Love requires the option to hate. Obedience requires the option to disobey. Adam was created with all of these desires in him. “Inherited sin” did not incline him towards disobedience. It was his natural desire to place his own will above YHWH's. It is human nature, but it does not make us sinners from birth. It merely gives us the ability to make the choice to become sinners when we are old enough to understand the difference between right and wrong.
So, I ask you, how do you explain Adam's desire to disobey YHWH? Where did it come from? (This is also not a rhetorical question. I would appreciate an answer.)
You seem to be saying that because we have human nature we are condemned to the second death from birth, but I say that our human nature does not condemn us in YHWH's eyes. It is the choices that we make in life, when we are old enough to know right from wrong, that do.
In short, you seem to think we are sinners because of who we are, whereas I think that we are sinners because of the things that we actually do.
Whatistrue,
I don't think we're going in circles at all. If we're still discussing this verse in a couple pages….then circles.
“For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.”
I don't understand how you can see this verse differently. Yes, it's comparing two things. But if we simplify it and just look at one thing that it states: “by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,” I think that would simplify it.
By one man [Adam's] disobedience many were made sinners.
You say one man cannot have a negative impact on other men.
But that's clearly not what this, or the verse before it says.
How can Adam make others sinners, by his disobedience?
'By Adam's disobedience MANY were made sinners.'
I think this argues against everything you have said.
I think this proves inherited sin.Quote Ok, David, this is what it all comes down to I suppose. You equate human nature with “inherited sin”, whereas I see human nature as human nature, created in us by YHWH. So you suggest that Jehovah created us with an inclination towards disobedience. Why would he do that? All his activity is perfect. Why would he want us to disobey?
Quote Where did Adam get the inclination to do his own will rather than YHWH's? Was it some “inherited sin nature” working in his members? Was he forced by the Adversary, against his own “perfect” nature, to disobey YHWH? I say no.
Adam was not a robot. Lovingly, he had free will. Jesus was tested, yet he was perfect. If he couldn't have sinned, how could it be said that he was “tempted” by the tempter? It would have been no temptation, and Jesus wasn't a robot either.
No, he wasn't forced to sin.Sorry, I can't even read the rest of your post. I have to be at work very soon. I'll talk more about this later
david.
WhatisTrue,
Quote In short, you seem to think we are sinners because of who we are, whereas I think that we are sinners because of the things that we actually do.
Well, actually I think both. Again, I say, I am not saying that there aren't scritpures that speak of the specific bad things that people do as sins. We all know that to do bad is to sin.
It's the other scriptures, such as Romans 5:18,19 that make us think that beyond going against Jehovah's standards, “missing” or not hitting Jehovah's standards, there are also references to that fact that because of Adam's disobedience, and not ours, “many were made sinners.” This is what YOUR Bible says. “For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners.” (Rom 5:19, your Bible)
So there is no question that doing bad is sinning. That is not what we are arguing. We all agree on that. We simply feel the Bible definition of sin is wider than that.
If you specifically have to sin to be a sinner, than why does this scripture say that you, WhatisTrue, and everyone else “were made sinners,” “by one man's disobedience,” or sin. This prooves it. You can't simply dismiss this, or try to change it, because your Bible says in very plain English exactly what I believe. I believe exactly what this scripture in your Bible says, and I also believe what all the other scriptures that speak of specifically doing bad as sinning.
Both definitions fit, because they are both refer to us as “missing” in something.Quote Ok, David, this is what it all comes down to I suppose. You equate human nature with “inherited sin”, whereas I see human nature as human nature, created in us by YHWH.
I'm not sure what this means. What do you mean by human nature? Are you saying that it's human nature to want to sin?Quote So, I ask you, how do you explain Adam's desire to disobey YHWH? Where did it come from? (This is also not a rhetorical question. I would appreciate an answer.) Do not try to imply that God put a desire in Adam for him to disobey.
1 JOHN 2:16
“because everything in the world—the desire of the flesh and the desire of the eyes and the showy display of one’s means of life—does not originate with the Father, but originates with the world.
Today, Satan is the “ruler of the world,” and these bad desires “originate with the world.”
Back then, it was Satan that put that desire in him. He was created perfect, but he had free will. Once he chose to abuse that free will, he was no longer perfect. He was tainted with sin. His eyes were opened.JAMES 1:13-15
“When under trial, let no one say: “I am being tried by God.” For with evil things God cannot be tried nor does he himself try anyone. But each one is tried by being drawn out and enticed by his own desire. Then the desire, when it has become fertile, gives birth to sin; in turn, sin, when it has been accomplished, brings forth death.”I know you will have some comments on the last scripture. Go ahead.
But I can not let Romans 5:18,19 rest, as it seems to say exactly what I believe and seems to be absolutely devastating to what you believe.David,
You wrote:
Quote I don't think we're going in circles at all. If we're still discussing this verse in a couple pages….then circles. Fair enough. Let's continue until one of us changes his mind or says “uncle”.
You wrote:
Quote I don't understand how you can see this verse differently. Yes, it's comparing two things. But if we simplify it and just look at one thing that it states: “by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,” I think that would simplify it. On the contrary, I think this is what is called taking a verse out of context. By isolating this one phrase from the rest of the passage, you are able to pour into it whatever preconceived notions that you have. But that is not a sound way to study scripture. Let's look at the whole verse in your translation again. It says:
“For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”
This is a compound sentence making a direct comparison between two things, equating one with the other. You can not use the first part of this verse to teach universal inherited sin without making the last part of this verse into a formula for universal salvation. For just as one, likewise the other. If we were made sinners involuntarily, then we shall also be made righteous involuntarily. I don't think that Paul is trying to teach that in this passage. You can only conclude that the first part of this verse teaches “inherited sin” if you remove it from the context of the rest of the verse, (as well as the passage).
Quote You say one man cannot have a negative impact on other men. I never said that. Sin has consequences even for the innocent. Yahshua suffered the consequences for sin, yet he was completely innocent. Suffering the consequences for a sin does not make one a sinner. Otherwise, Yahshua would be the chief sinner of mankind, since he suffered the consequences for all of mankind's sins. Adam's sin had consequences for all of mankind, but that is not the same thing as saying that all mankind were deemed sinners because of Adam. It's a fine distinction, but an important one.
You wrote:
Quote So you suggest that Jehovah created us with an inclination towards disobedience. Why would he do that? All his activity is perfect. Why would he want us to disobey? …
Do not try to imply that God put a desire in Adam for him to disobey.
Ok, apparently my point wasn't as clear as I thought. Let me try it from a different angle:
If our “inherited sinful nature” is what gives us a desire to sin, (which is how I presume you intepret James 1:15), then where did Adam's desire to sin come from? James 1:14 says, “But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed.” What do you say?
(By the way, I am equating human nature with the desire to fulfill carnal desires such as food, sex, pleasure, etc.. None of these things are sinful innately, but they can become sinful when pursued in opposition to YHWH's ways.)
So again, where did Adam's desire to sin come from if not from within himself? And how could he even have such desires if only a “sinful nature” could produce them?
“For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”
You are comparing the wrong things. It's not saying that we were constituted sinners in the same manner as we were constituted righteous. That makes no sense. It's comparing the one man who acted in a way to consitute us sinners with the one man who acted in such a way to consitute us righteous.
And no, I am not taking it out of context. I am trying to simplify it for. Look at it again:
“For just as through the disobedience of the one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”Regardless of what the second part of the sentence says, the first part of the sentence is still true. “Through the disobedience of one man many were constituted sinners.” This doesn't change if we take the second part of the sentence away.
“Just as you think I am misinterpreting this scripture, so I think you are misinterpreting it.”
Two things being compared above. Take away the second part of the sentence and the first part of the sentence isn't changed. Yes, it's comparing two things. But those things are still true, whether compared or not.
Quote
So again, where did Adam's desire to sin come from if not from within himself?
Ok, there was this guy who came to be called Satan the Devil. He put the desire in Adam, actually first in Eve, making the tree look like something to be desired.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
