- This topic is empty.
- Posts
“Let's agree to not disagree.”
I really don't expect either of us to change our minds or to say uncle, but when I introduced the scripture in Romans, and you began talking about human nature, it started to seem to me like you do believe in inherited sin, but call it by another name, and believe that Jehovah created us with an inclination towards badness.
David,
You wrote:
Quote 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. So, the devil made him do it?
Funny, that was essentially Adam's defense too, but YHWH didn't buy it. Neither do I.
Human nature:
“But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed.” – James 1:14We are responsible for our own sins, and we can't blame any one else, including the Adversary.
You wrote:
Quote
… it started to seem to me like you do believe in inherited sin, but call it by another name, and believe that Jehovah created us with an inclination towards badness.Well, I don't believe that. I believe that YHWH created us with natural human desires that we must either subject to His will or our own. The former is righteousness; the latter, (when it conflicts with YHWH's will), is sin.
You wrote:
Quote “Let's agree to not disagree.” Does that mean you want to get off the merry-go-round now?
Quote So, the devil made him do it? Funny, that was essentially Adam's defense too, but YHWH didn't buy it. Neither do I.
I didn't say the devil made him do it. But that IS where the desire originated.
After Satan spoke to here, we find these words:
“Consequently the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was something to be longed for to the eyes, yes, the tree was desirable to look upon.”Satan made the tree look desirable. But it was still Adam and Eve's responsibility.
Quote You wrote:
Quote
“Let's agree to not disagree.”Does that mean you want to get off the merry-go-round now?
No, that was a joke: Let's agree to NOT disagree. I feel you are closing your eyes to the very clear words in Romans 5:18,19:ROMANS 5:18-19
“So, then, as through one trespass [Adam's sin] 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. For just as THROUGH THE DISOBEDIENCE OF ONE MAN [ADAM] MANY WERE CONSTITUTED SINNERS, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”I still think this shatters what you are saying and is very clear. I don't believe any amount of re-wording will change the basic truth stated in this verse:
Adam's disobedience made many sinners.
That is how I define inherited sin, and that is exactly what this verse says.
Do you not believe that:
Adam's disobeidence made many sinners?Quote 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.
It's not guilt that inherit from Adam, as we are not guilty of Adam's sin. We do clearly inherit something though–we inherit the title of: “sinners”
“Through the disobedience of one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners.” (Romans 5:19)
“in Adam all are dying.” (1 Cor 15:22)
And we inherit death, because of sin.“through one man [Adam] sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned—.” (Rom 5:12)
You keep saying: We don't inherit guilt. Guilt is a consequence of sin, not sin itself. No, we don't inherit guilt. But because of Adam's actions, we are “constituted sinners.” That is clear.
David,
I thought for sure we were done here, but we can keep going around if you like. For the record, this is the ninth, or so, post on Romans 5:19.
You wrote:
Quote I still think this shatters what you are saying and is very clear. I don't believe any amount of re-wording will change the basic truth stated in this verse: Adam's disobedience made many sinners.
That is how I define inherited sin, and that is exactly what this verse says.
I haven't reworded anything. I have taken your translation and highlighted some important words in the text:
“For just as through the disobedience of one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”
The structure of this sentence is as follows:
“For just as [clause A], likewise also [clause B].”
You can put anything you like into clauses A & B, but the implied relationship is the same.
“For just as [Clyde likes to smoke], likewise also [Joe likes to drink].”
Or better yet:
“For just as [sin is genetic and is inherited], likewise also [righteousness is genetic and will be inherited].”Whatever you think applies to clause A “likewise also” applies to clause B.
You wrote:
Quote Do you not believe that:
Adam's disobeidence made many sinners?Yes, I believe that Adam's disobedience made many sinners in the same way that Messiah's obedience will make many righteous.
In scriptural study, context is always important. (I believe you stress that elsewhere in your comments about John 20:28.)
You wrote:
Quote I didn't say the devil made him do it. But that IS where the desire originated.
After Satan spoke to here, we find these words:
“Consequently the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it was something to be longed for to the eyes, yes, the tree was desirable to look upon.”Satan made the tree look desirable. But it was still Adam and Eve's responsibility.
I beg to differ. No one can make you desire something that you don't already desire. A tempter can only bring out the desires that already exist inside of you. An example:
Sally loves chocolate but hates pizza. In either case, she is on a diet so she is not eating either. Johnny comes along with a plate full of pizza and tells Sally that she should try it because it is delicious. Do you think Sally will be “tempted” by this offer? Tommy comes along with fudge covered brownie smothered in chocolate sauce and slides the plate in front of Sally. Do you think that Sally will be “tempted” by this offer?
The serpent could not put a desire in Adam or Eve that was not already within them. “Well”, you might ask, “what desires did Adam and Eve have that would cause them to sin?” I would answer the following.
Adam and Eve desired good food and they desired to be like YHWH. Neither of those things are inherently bad. In fact, YHWH wants us both to delight in creation and for us to try to be like Him. In this case, however, those desires went against YHWH's expressed will. Adam and Eve had the choice to subject their desires to their own wills or YHWH's. They chose their own. That was the sin – not the desire. Temptation is not sin, but temptation can lead to sin. That's why James puts it this way:
“But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.” – James 1:14-15
Desire gives birth to sin, not the other way around.
You wrote:
Quote You keep saying: We don't inherit guilt. Guilt is a consequence of sin, not sin itself. No, we don't inherit guilt. But because of Adam's actions, we are “constituted sinners.” That is clear. So newborn babies aren't born guilty of anything? So they deserve the second death merely for being born?
Whatistrue,
Your statement is not totally true, The scriptures say that Eve was deceived:And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression (1 Tim 2:14)
Her desire was based on deception. The deception created a desire that was false, but now that the transgression is already passed the consequences follow. My point is that the desire was not there to begin with,but was placed there.
Quote “For just as [Clyde likes to smoke], likewise also [Joe likes to drink].”
The problem is: You are taking this very clear sentence to mean that: Joe drinks by lighting his drinks of fire.
That's the conclusion you came to.
It says: “For just as,” doesn't it?
That's what you keep saying to me.Yet, that is not what is being comparing. The actions of one man had an effect on us. The actions of Jesus also meant a great deal to us. Just as One man could bring about something bad, one man bought a way out.
Since you or I are clearly confused as to what is being compared, and since that is not the real issue anyone, but whether Adam's actions constituted us sinners, we need not look at the second half of the verse. The first part of the verse is true, isn't it?
Yes, two things are being compared.But check this out:
“For just as [Clyde likes to smoke], likewise also [Joe likes to drink].”
Notice that part 1 of this sentence is true, and part 2 is true. Yes, they are being compared, but that doesn't make part 1 any less true if we take the comparison away. Regardless of whether or not Joe likes to drink, we know that Clyde likes to smoke.
Does this make sense?So regardless of what you keep saying about HOW the two are compared, the fact that “through the disobedience of one man [Adam] many were constituted sinners” cannot be nullified.
Quote Yes, I believe that Adam's disobedience made many sinners in the same way that Messiah's obedience will make many righteous.
What does this mean?
So you “believe that Adam's disobedience made many sinners.” Regardless of how it did this, or what we compare it to, what I thought we were discussing is: “Did Adam's disobedience make other's sinners?” So, as far as I can tell, the answer is “Yes.” You yourself said it.Quote So newborn babies aren't born guilty of anything? So they deserve the second death merely for being born? It's a fact. We die. Perhaps you'd like to question God on this yourself. Apparently, they deserve death for some reason, because all babies grow old and die. And since Jehovah created us, you say, somehow he is responsible. And therefore, babies do deserve to die for something, because yes, they die. It's unfair, you say.
Jehovah is letting us see what happens when we leave him out of the picture.
It's a painful lesson. A child might scream in terror as the father takes him to get a needle. The child doesn't understand that in the long run, it is to the benefit of the child.
The issue of Universal sovereignty must be settled. Clearly, we need God.Sultan,
Nice to see you still around in this discussion.
You wrote:
Quote Whatistrue,
Your statement is not totally true, The scriptures say that Eve was deceived:And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression (1 Tim 2:14)
Her desire was based on deception. The deception created a desire that was false, but now that the transgression is already passed the consequences follow. My point is that the desire was not there to begin with,but was placed there.
I am sure you won't be surprised but I beg to differ. I don't think that the deception had anything to do with where the desire came from. Continuing with my example above, if Johnny lies to Sally and tells her that his pizza tastes just like chocalate, it is still Sally's desire for chocolate that will tempt her to eat the food that he is offering. The serpent deceived Eve about the results of her actions but Eve still knew that her desires went against YHWH's command. Take a look at the original account:
Genesis 3:1-7
Quote Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which [YHWH] God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”
And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’”
Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.The serpent doesn't even say anything about the fruit being tasty, yet this is shown as one of Eve's desires. She was deceived about the consequences of her actions, but the desires were her own.
David,
For the record, this is now about the eleventh post on Romans 5:19.
You wrote:
Quote Since you or I are clearly confused as to what is being compared, and since that is not the real issue anyone, but whether Adam's actions constituted us sinners, we need not look at the second half of the verse. The first part of the verse is true, isn't it?
Yes, two things are being compared.Yes, two things are being compared, and, yes, one of us is confused as to what is being compared. Grammatically, the sentence breaks down this way:
Conjunction #1: “For just as”
Dependent clause #1: “through the disobedience of one man [Adam]”
Subject #1: “many”
Verb #1: “were constituted”
Object #1: “sinners”
Conjunction #2: “likewise also”
Dependent clause #2: “through the obedience of the one [person]”
Subject #2: “many”
Verb #2: “will be constituted”
Object #2: “righteous”
What's being compared here? The main subjects in both sentences are the “many”. The main action in both sentences involve the “constitution” of the “many”. And the main object of both sentences involve the state of the “many”. Therefore, if you assume that the “constitution” in the first sentence is passive, genetic, or involuntary, then the same applies to the “constitution” in the second sentence, because the conjunctions in this sentence tell us: “For just as … likewise also … .”
I believe its your turn again.
You wrote:
Quote So you “believe that Adam's disobedience made many sinners.” Regardless of how it did this, or what we compare it to, what I thought we were discussing is: “Did Adam's disobedience make other's sinners?” So, as far as I can tell, the answer is “Yes.” You yourself said it. The question is not whether many were made sinners. The question is how. I say, “in the same way that many will be made righteous”. In other words, by following the example of their “elder brother”. Many were made sinners by rejecting YHWH and turning to sin. Many will be made righteous by rejecting sin and turning to YHWH. After all, it is the obedience, or disobedience, of each man that is catylyst for change. Yahshua's obedience didn't automatically make men righteous. Neither did Adam's disobedience automatically make men sinners.
You wrote:
Quote It's a fact. We die. Perhaps you'd like to question God on this yourself. Apparently, they deserve death for some reason, because all babies grow old and die. And since Jehovah created us, you say, somehow he is responsible. And therefore, babies do deserve to die for something, because yes, they die. It's unfair, you say. Could you be more precise. Are you saying that being born means we deserve the second death? Yes? No?
By the way, I noticed that you had no comment on my statements about where Adam and Eve's desire came from. Having you given up on pursuing that issue, or are you still thinking about it?
Quote (WhatIsTrue @ Mar. 10 2006,21:52) Sultan, Nice to see you still around in this discussion.
You wrote:
Quote Whatistrue,
Your statement is not totally true, The scriptures say that Eve was deceived:And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression (1 Tim 2:14)
Her desire was based on deception. The deception created a desire that was false, but now that the transgression is already passed the consequences follow. My point is that the desire was not there to begin with,but was placed there.
I am sure you won't be surprised but I beg to differ. I don't think that the deception had anything to do with where the desire came from. Continuing with my example above, if Johnny lies to Sally and tells her that his pizza tastes just like chocalate, it is still Sally's desire for chocolate that will tempt her to eat the food that he is offering. The serpent deceived Eve about the results of her actions but Eve still knew that her desires went against YHWH's command. Take a look at the original account:
Genesis 3:1-7
Quote Now the serpent was more cunning than any beast of the field which [YHWH] God had made. And he said to the woman, “Has God indeed said, ‘You shall not eat of every tree of the garden’?”
And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’”
Then the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. 7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves coverings.The serpent doesn't even say anything about the fruit being tasty, yet this is shown as one of Eve's desires. She was deceived about the consequences of her actions, but the desires were her own.
I have said all that I have to say. I believe it is obvious that the term sin has more than one meaning based on the texts I gave in prior posts. There is really nothing else for me to say. You either accept it or reject it. I still may chime in here and there, but other than that I don't think it's necesarry to “beat a dead horse.
Quote ou wrote:
Quote
So you “believe that Adam's disobedience made many sinners.” Regardless of how it did this, or what we compare it to, what I thought we were discussing is: “Did Adam's disobedience make other's sinners?” So, as far as I can tell, the answer is “Yes.” You yourself said it.The question is not whether many were made sinners. The question is how. I say, “in the same way that many will be made righteous”. In other words, by following the example of their “elder brother”. Many were made sinners by rejecting YHWH and turning to 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.”For…just…as…through the disobedience of one man [Adam]—many were made sinners.
Every thing I've ever heard in English leads me to believe that “how” many were made sinners was “through the disobedience of one man.”Quote The question is not whether many were made sinners. The question is how. I say, “in the same way that many will be made righteous”.
So people were made sinners in the same way that they were made righteous–Jesus' sacrificial death, obeying God…?
Or does the verse actually say:
ROMANS 5:19
“For just as THROUGH THE DISOBEDIENCE OF ONE MAN MANY WERE CONSTITUTED SINNERS, likewise also through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”Quote The question is not whether many were made sinners. The question is how. I say, “in the same way that many will be made righteous”. In other words,
Yes, what followed were “other words.”No responce to the your illustration:
Quote But check this out: “For just as [Clyde likes to smoke], likewise also [Joe likes to drink].”
Notice that part 1 of this sentence is true, and part 2 is true. Yes, they are being compared, but that doesn't make part 1 any less true if we take the comparison away. Regardless of whether or not Joe likes to drink, we know that Clyde likes to smoke.
Sure,we're comparing two things, the actions of two single men–the actions of THOSE men and the effects they had.
Do you really think a person can't look at that sentence and understand that Clyde likes to smoke–Irregardless of how we compare that to other things?“through the disobedience of the one man many were constituted sinners.”
Quote In other words, by following the example of their “elder brother”.
So you say it's by 'OUR DISOBEDIENCE' that many (us) were constituted sinners. Those are certainly “other words,” all right.
Notice that that is not at all what the verse says. It says: “Through the disobedience of ONE MAN,” namely Adam, “many were constituted sinners.”I believe this is the reason we continue on with this verse and the reason you keep mentioning that we continue on with this verse.
Quote “The question is not whether many were made sinners. The question is how. I say, “in the same way that many will be made righteous”. In other words, by following the example of their “elder brother”. Many were made sinners by rejecting YHWH and turning to sin.”
I know I just made this point above, but it seems so wrong to me, I have to repeat it.
With regard to Romans 5:19 WhatisTrue, you say:
“The question is not whether many were made sinners. The question is how. I say “in the same way that many will be made righteous”. In other words, [many were made sinners] by following the example of their “elder brother.”“WhatisTrue,
You are clearly saying that it is through OUR OWN DISOBEDIENCE that we are made sinners, and you say this with regard to Romans 5:19.ROMANS 5:19
“through the disobedience of the one man [Adam, not us] many were constituted sinners.”
Does this scripture show that it is our disobedience that constituted us sinners? Or the disobedience of Adam?1 CORINTHIANS 15:22
“For just as IN ADAM ALL ARE DYING, so also in the Christ all will be made alive.”ROMANS 7:17
“But now the one working it out is no longer I, but SIN THAT RESIDES IN ME.”ROMANS 7:20
“If, now, what I do not wish is what I do, the one working it out is no longer I, but the SIN DWELLING IN ME.”Sin seems to be “in” us, in our members.
ROMANS 7:23
“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.”David,
It's this simple:
Messiah was obedient. Does that mean we are now all righteous? If not, why not? After all, the verse says, “through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.”
We can spit in YHWH's face, turn our back on Him, and curse His Holy Spirit, but we will still be righteous because of Messiah's obedience. Is that how you are reading this verse, because that is how you are interpreting the first half of it.
Also, my question was, did you have any comment on the following?
Quote I beg to differ. No one can make you desire something that you don't already desire. A tempter can only bring out the desires that already exist inside of you. An example: Sally loves chocolate but hates pizza. In either case, she is on a diet so she is not eating either. Johnny comes along with a plate full of pizza and tells Sally that she should try it because it is delicious. Do you think Sally will be “tempted” by this offer? Tommy comes along with fudge covered brownie smothered in chocolate sauce and slides the plate in front of Sally. Do you think that Sally will be “tempted” by this offer?
The serpent could not put a desire in Adam or Eve that was not already within them. “Well”, you might ask, “what desires did Adam and Eve have that would cause them to sin?” I would answer the following.
Adam and Eve desired good food and they desired to be like YHWH. Neither of those things are inherently bad. In fact, YHWH wants us both to delight in creation and for us to try to be like Him. In this case, however, those desires went against YHWH's expressed will. Adam and Eve had the choice to subject their desires to their own wills or YHWH's. They chose their own. That was the sin – not the desire. Temptation is not sin, but temptation can lead to sin. That's why James puts it this way:
“But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.” – James 1:14-15
Desire gives birth to sin, not the other way around.
And my other question:
Quote Could you be more precise. Are you saying that being born means we deserve the second death? Yes? No? (Sorry for the delay. It's a busy week.)
Quote David,
OK, I agree so far.Quote It's this simple:
I agree. It is simple.Quote Messiah was obedient. Does that mean we are now all righteous? If not, why not? After all, the verse says, “through the obedience of the one [person] many will be constituted righteous.” We can spit in YHWH's face, turn our back on Him, and curse His Holy Spirit, but we will still be righteous because of Messiah's obedience. Is that how you are reading this verse, because that is how you are interpreting the first half of it.
You WOULD be right, but you miss something.
Let's look at Romans 5:19 one more time.
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 be constituted righteous.”Because of one man's (ADAM'S) disobedience (not ours, as you claim) many WERE “made sinners,” as your Bible says.
Likewaise through the obeidience of one, (not us) Jesus' obedience many WILL BE consitituted righteous, or “righteous for life.” (Rom 5:18)So in answer to your question:
“Does that mean we are NOW ALL righteous? If not, why not?”
The answer: Because the Bible doesn't say so. It says: “will be.” That's why.So my arguement stands.
And in view of your confusion, I'd like to change your illustration to fit a little better.“so just as [Clyde (the dad) did smoke], likewise also [Joe (the son) will become a smoker.]
Did Clyde smoke? Do we have to look at the second half of the sentence to know that clyde smoked, or that it was because of Adam's disobedience (not ours) that we WERE constituted sinners?
NO, we don't.I'm sorry for repeating this scripture so many times. It's just that this scripture, and the verses preceeding it are in my mind, the very definition of “inherited sin.” And they prove it, despite your trying to wriggle around it.
I have a question:
Does sin dwell in you? Or is it only something you do?
ROMANS 7:17
“But now the one working it out is no longer I, but SIN THAT RESIDES IN ME.”
ROMANS 7:20
“If, now, what I do not wish is what I do, the one working it out is no longer I, but the SIN DWELLING IN ME.”
Sin seems to be “in” us, in our members.
ROMANS 7:23
“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.”Quote Also, my question was, did you have any comment on the following?
Quote
I beg to differ. No one can make you desire something that you don't already desire. A tempter can only bring out the desires that already exist inside of you. An example:Sally loves chocolate but hates pizza. In either case, she is on a diet so she is not eating either. Johnny comes along with a plate full of pizza and tells Sally that she should try it because it is delicious. Do you think Sally will be “tempted” by this offer? Tommy comes along with fudge covered brownie smothered in chocolate sauce and slides the plate in front of Sally. Do you think that Sally will be “tempted” by this offer?
The serpent could not put a desire in Adam or Eve that was not already within them. “Well”, you might ask, “what desires did Adam and Eve have that would cause them to sin?” I would answer the following.
Adam and Eve desired good food and they desired to be like YHWH. Neither of those things are inherently bad. In fact, YHWH wants us both to delight in creation and for us to try to be like Him. In this case, however, those desires went against YHWH's expressed will. Adam and Eve had the choice to subject their desires to their own wills or YHWH's. They chose their own. That was the sin – not the desire. Temptation is not sin, but temptation can lead to sin. That's why James puts it this way:
“But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.” – James 1:14-15
Desire gives birth to sin, not the other way around.
Yes, the point I was making was:
It is hard to desire something you have never seen or thought of or imagined, right?
If I am from a far away remote untouched land and have never seen a car before and someone shows me a car, I may start to want one. What part did the one who showed me the car play?
I am not arguing the scriptures you show in this regard. I believe this started with you asking where the desire came from, for Eve to sin, right?Quote
The serpent could not put a desire in Adam or Eve that was not already within them.
Right, he couldn't put it in her. And nor could the one with the car put a desire in the one who has never seen the car. He could only create the situation where that desire would be conceived.David,
You wrote:
Quote So in answer to your question:
“Does that mean we are NOW ALL righteous? If not, why not?”
The answer: Because the Bible doesn't say so. It says: “will be.” That's why.Thanks for correcting my verb tense. Let me rephrase the question:
Will all be made righteous? If not, why not?
You wrote:
Quote Yes, the point I was making was:
It is hard to desire something you have never seen or thought of or imagined, right?
If I am from a far away remote untouched land and have never seen a car before and someone shows me a car, I may start to want one. What part did the one who showed me the car play?
I am not arguing the scriptures you show in this regard. I believe this started with you asking where the desire came from, for Eve to sin, right?So, Eve had never seen the fruit before and was never told that it was a tree that would give her knowledge? Is that what you are saying?
You wrote:
Quote have a question:
Does sin dwell in you? Or is it only something you do?
ROMANS 7:17
“But now the one working it out is no longer I, but SIN THAT RESIDES IN ME.”Yes, sin dwells in me, so does anger, jealousy, love, joy, truth, patience, understanding, etc.. (It's a metaphor, as in, “…the truth which abides in us…”, [2 John 1:2].)
You still have not answered the following:
Quote Could you be more precise. Are you saying that being born means we deserve the second death? Yes? No? REVELATION 20:14-15
“And death and Ha´des were hurled into the lake of fire. This means the second death, the lake of fire. Furthermore, whoever was not found written in the book of life was hurled into the lake of fire.”Quote You still have not answered the following:
Quote
Could you be more precise. Are you saying that being born means we deserve the second death? Yes? No?No, being born does not mean we deserve to be destroyed forever.
Death entered the world through sin.
ROMANS 5:12
“That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned—.”Death entered the world through Adam.
1 CORINTHIANS 15:21
“For since death is through a man, resurrection of the dead is also through a man.”In Rev 20:14,15, “death” is thrown into the lake of fire–this means the second death.
We must differentiate between death and the second death (which swallows up even “death.”)Quote You still have not answered the following:
Quote
Could you be more precise. Are you saying that being born means we deserve the second death? Yes? No?I'm certainly not saying that being born means we “deserve” the second death.
(I'm not sure “deserve” is the right word, even for the death that everyone suffers because of Adam. Do animals deserve to die? Yet they all do. Did they do anything to deverse this?)Why do you ask?
Quote (david @ Mar. 18 2006,22:19) Death entered the world through sin.
ROMANS 5:12
“That is why, just as through one man sin entered into the world and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men because they had all sinned—.”Death entered the world through Adam.
1 CORINTHIANS 15:21
“For since death is through a man, resurrection of the dead is also through a man.”In Rev 20:14,15, “death” is thrown into the lake of fire–this means the second death.
We must differentiate between death and the second death (which swallows up even “death.”)Quote You still have not answered the following:
Quote
Could you be more precise. Are you saying that being born means we deserve the second death? Yes? No?I'm certainly not saying that being born means we “deserve” the second death.
(I'm not sure “deserve” is the right word, even for the death that everyone suffers because of Adam. Do animals deserve to die? Yet they all do. Did they do anything to deverse this?)Why do you ask?
I believe the whole of the earth is cursed that's why we need a “New Earth and Heaven”.
Before the curse no rain fell to the ground. The fruit of every tree and vegettation. After the curse it is by the sweat of the brow that we do eat.Gen 3:17 And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in toil shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life;
Gen 3:18 thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field;
Gen 3:19 in the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.kenrch
David,
You wrote:
Quote I'm certainly not saying that being born means we “deserve” the second death.
(I'm not sure “deserve” is the right word, even for the death that everyone suffers because of Adam. Do animals deserve to die? Yet they all do. Did they do anything to deverse this?)Why do you ask?
I ask because it shows your understanding of “inherited sin”. For example, you point out that animals die, as do plants. Do you believe that this is due to “inherited sin”?
By the way, you skipped right over my last question in reference to Romans 5:19. It was:
Quote Will all be made righteous? If not, why not? Quote I ask because it shows your understanding of “inherited sin”. For example, you point out that animals die, as do plants. Do you believe that this is due to “inherited sin”?
No, I do not believe animals die because of inherited sin. Does the plant on your desk that dies “deserve” to die? Does your pet poodle “deserve” to die because of sins it's commited? No. Yet they do. My point is that perhaps you, yourself didn't do anything to deserve to die. Nor did the baby that dies.
My point is that a thing can die without deserving it.“in Adam all are dying.” (1 cor 15:22)
The second death is a completely different thing, though.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
