SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : can you prove sin nature?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 Next Page )
PosterThread









 Re:

thingsabove, what do you think it means to be "in Adam"?

 2008/11/23 14:07









 Re:

Hi Taylor,
Adam would have died eventually if he had not eaten of the tree of life. That's what God said just not verbatim.

About abortion. I want to clear this up. Did you think I meant ALL of God's justice? That would make even less sense. [b]Here's the question: Does an aborted baby get what they deserve in God's eyes?[/b] It is a [b]yes[/b] or [b]no[/b] question. There is no false dilemma. You can't cleave justice in two and say it's Just according to one half but not the other. Yes or No? Is abortion deserved or undeserved?

Let's reason through this verse,
[color=990000]Romans 5:12[/color]
[b]...just as through one man sin entered into the world...[/b]
Notice Paul says "just as". That's the indicator that he is building up a comparison. Does sin enter your kitchen if you sin in your kitchen? In a figurative sense, yes. Does it stay in your kitchen after the sinning stops? No. Not even figuratively.
[b]and death through sin,[/b]
The soul who sins shall die. The wages of sin is death. Babies don't earn those wages otherwise God's word would be self-contradictory, which cannot be.
[b]and so death spread to all men,[/b]
How did death "spread"? was it contagious?
[b][u]because all sinned[/u][/b]
There it is. The soul who sins shall die. Paul's not talking about babies and limbo and nonsense like that here. He's not presenting some wild idea that since we were figuratively in Adam loins that we sinned. You can't hold the book too close to your face, you have to look at the context. Peter said some of these things were hard to understand. That's because they require discernment and thinking them through. Paul had wisdom from God. He was given a gift to explain these things. He's figuratively comparing Adam to Christ. Adam sinned, everyone who did what Adam did earned the wages of separation from God which is eternal death. Christ obeyed, everyone who does what Christ did will receive the gift of communion with God which is eternal life.

Here it is again, Adam on left, Jesus on right:
[b]
[color=990000]Adam disobeyed[/color] // [color=009900]Jesus obeyed[/color]
[color=990000]Follow Adam = disobey[/color] // [color=009900]Follow Jesus = obey[/color]
[color=990000]Disobedience = death[/color] // [color=009900]Obedience = life[/color]
[/b]

Now if when Paul says "because all sinned" he was introducing a philosophy that is contrary to the rest of God's word (which word everyone ignores because they think it would be heresy to examine their interpretation of a handful of figurative passages) then the figure would end up implying that obedience by faith was not the underlying premise (which it is, that's the whole point of the gospel. to believe and obey and thus live). If [b]involuntary imputation[/b] is the underlying premise (which is not stated here by Paul, is inserted according to your preconceived interpretation, and is contrary to reason, justice, and God's word) then it would follow that eternal life came through [b]involuntary imputation[/b] which is to call Christ and his Father a liar and to resist the Holy Spirit which convicts of sin so that men would [b]choose[/b] to repent and trust in Jesus. The Jews believed they had involuntary imputation to eternal life through Abraham. But they didn't walk as Abraham because they didn't have his faith. God doesn't want pets, he wants sons. He wants love. Love is voluntary. If loving God was involuntary then martyrdom would not prove faith. It would be kind of sick even. God is not demented and evil but that is the result of the wrong line of thinking. God's not angry at you because of [b]who you are[/b], he's angry because of [b]what you've done[/b]. He wants you to live. That means repent and trust him. You have to do it by making a free choice. He doesn't want to control you the way the world wants to control. He doesn't want to manipulate you or trick you or force you like people's parents do to them all too often. He wants us to choose. He wants us to love him. There is rejoicing when someone makes this choice. It pleases him, like the father of the prodigal son. God is no monster. He is clean. His heart is clean, righteous, pure. He's angry. He's very angry. With sinners. He's angry with what they've done and he demands that they stop. He's not angry because they were born and he's not angry with them because of what Adam or anyone else did. He's angry because they've been sinning. No one smokes because they are a smoker! That would be ridiculous. I used to smoke. If I am a smoker then according to that logic I would still smoke. But my nature didn't change, I stopped smoking. That's why I'm not a smoker anymore. Because, by definition, a smoker is someone who smokes. By definition a sinner is someone who sins. If you were born a sinner then God would be angry at you for the way you were born. God's not a Nazi, or a skinhead, or some prejudiced bigot. His ways are just. It is our ways that are not just he says. Read Ezekiel. We have judged falsely. His judgment is true. You deserve punishment for [b]your choices[/b] not for [b]being born[/b]. God's mad because people haven't been loving and obeying him. They haven't sought him in their hearts that he would deliver them. Not deliver them from the way he made them. Deliver them from their choices. He would rather take us by the right hand and lead us in his ways. But we have to be willing, we have to choose to be willing. He's doesn't want to drag us like an impatient parent does with their child. He wants us to TURN and be healed. God even has compassion for animals. Much more compassion than men do. How much more for innocent babies then. And men if they would repent and seek him.

I know reprobate is in the bible but I don't know what you think I was saying about you specifically. If you have any questions about that I don't mind. We can look at the passage(s) it's in. I only remember one offhand.

Ben

 2008/11/23 14:09









 Re:

ginnyrose, My parents did correct me. Belt, wooden spoon, wooden cutting board, not in anger but in love. I'm grateful to God for them. Thank you for reminding me. I wish they had disciplined me more but my mother died after two years of cancer when I was 15 so I missed out on some parenting during that time and afterward. It was hard for my father having three children and he had not had his own father around in his life so I don't think he knew how to handle me as I had become rebellious. But now I am grateful for the discipline that I did receive and I want to honor them for how they raised me.

My parents never spanked me because of the way I was born. They spanked me when I did wrong. Once a child is grown you chasten them with words instead. Telling your child you're spanking them because of the way they were born is emotionally abusive and it might force them into obeying you for a time but it won't be conveying the right lesson. Birth itself may seem disgusting and vile physically but children are not. God calls the blood of children innocent blood. The kingdom of heaven belongs to them.

I'm glad you spank your children (assuming they are not grown now) but I'm not glad that you have told them they are sinful by nature because they are innocent. If a retarded adult doesn't know right from wrong it doesn't prove that they are sinful. It only proves that they don't know. Once children are old enough to know then their sins are by their own free choice and not because you gave birth to them. You yourself may choose to be a sinner but your children can choose also. Read Ezekiel, the soul who sins shall die.

Ben

 2008/11/23 14:33









 Re:

Re:
thingsabove, what do you think it means to be "in Adam"?

My understanding is that we are born "in Adam", having the knowledge of good and evil within us. Having the law of sin and death in us. Because we are all born in Adam we all WILL SIN because of the knowledge of good and evil that is in us.

When we are "born" again in Jesus we are now in Jesus,a new creature, old things past away all things become new etc.

 2008/11/23 14:57
TaylorOtwell
Member



Joined: 2006/6/19
Posts: 927
Arkansas

 Re:

Ben,

Let's follow your own advice and pull the book back some and look at the rest of the passage to see if we can get some clarity for what Paul is saying.

Let's take a look at Romans 5:19:

For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. (Romans 5:19)

Let me highlight a few things:

For as [b]by the one man’s disobedience[/b] [i][u](cause)[/u][/i] [b]the many were made sinners[/b] [i][u](effect)[/u][/i], so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.

This verse plainly states that our sin (and being sinners) is directly related to Adam's sin. For it is by his disobedience that we were made sinners (Paul's words - not mine).

Likewise, Paul goes on to state that our righteousness is directly (and solely) related to Christ's obedience - through the substitutionary work upon the cross as a propitiation for his people.

All men by natural birth are imputed with the sin of Adam; all men who are spiritually born again by the Spirit of God are imputed with the righteousness of Christ.

I assume you do not believe Paul must be mistaken at this point in his letter? For he clearly states that because of Adam's disobedience, many were made sinners, which you have on numerous occasions called "unjust".

Longing for the truth to be vindicated,
Taylor


_________________
Taylor Otwell

 2008/11/23 15:15Profile
rbanks
Member



Joined: 2008/6/19
Posts: 1257


 Re:

Brother Ben,

I am now going to reply to this part of your post.

“Maybe you think understanding where I'm coming from will mean that "you are a liar and the truth is not in you"? I can't judge how much you've tried to understand because I'm not you. That's why I asked you to judge it. I see that you think you thought about my reasoning, which makes what I said seem out of place, but you thought about your reasoning which I'm already familiar with having believed such with conviction until a couple days ago. Since you don't understand my reasoning then how could you have thought about it? Peace to you. You have been friendly toward me which is nice and I wasn't trying to rebuke you”. – Ben

The word Liar had not recently crossed my mind but now that you mention it I decided to see if I could determine where you may have gotten it from.

Here are three verses of scripture in 1 John where the word liar is mentioned.

1Jo 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
1Jo 2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
1Jo 2:22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

I will not try to make God a liar because I know that I have sinned. I’m not trying to make my self out to be a liar by saying that I know Him and not keeping His commandments. I have hid His Word in my Heart that I might not sin against God.

I would also like for you to look at verse 22 where it says “who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is the antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

I have also gone back to your post and decided to look deeper into it.

Quote-Ben
“That's why I mentioned gnosticism because of the spirit of antichrist who denies that Jesus Christ came in the flesh. Well how successful do you think that spirit will be by saying "Jesus Christ didn't have real human flesh"? Not very successful right? It would be almost laughable because they would have practically quoted the very warning that condemns them! So how can antichrist get around that? Well what if instead of saying Jesus Christ's flesh was not human...we could say that MAN's flesh is SUB-human. But why would GOD make subhuman flesh? It must have BECOME subhuman because of our own fault. So when Adam sinned, his nature, his FLESH CHANGED and there was something about his flesh from that point on that made it DIFFERENT from the flesh of Jesus Christ who was NOT subhuman. It even sounds HUMBLE! Do you see? Think about it. Could this be the pile of wood shavings that proves the idol was originally just a block of wood? It would be SO OBVIOUS for them to say "Jesus didn't come in the flesh" So what if the sneakiest thing they could come up with was to change the definition of the word flesh. Now they're saying "Jesus didn't come in our flesh" NO! even that is too noticeable! "Jesus came in OUR flesh....but we don't have that same flesh ANYMORE since Adam" –Ben

1Jo 4:2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:
1Jo 4:3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.

You stated “That's why I mentioned gnosticism because of the spirit of antichrist who denies that Jesus Christ came in the flesh.

You also stated “Well what if instead of saying Jesus Christ's flesh was not human...we could say that MAN's flesh is SUB-human.

You also said “It would be SO OBVIOUS for them to say "Jesus didn't come in the flesh" So what if the sneakiest thing they could come up with was to change the definition of the word flesh. Now they're saying "Jesus didn't come in our flesh" NO! even that is too noticeable! "Jesus came in OUR flesh....but we don't have that same flesh ANYMORE since Adam”

I believe I see what you are saying, that you fear that if we were to say that Jesus’ flesh is not the same as ours we would be of the antichrist spirit. This would be wrong to do this, because His flesh is the same as ours, there is no sub-human flesh or different flesh.
Rome, by the doctrine of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, denies Christ's proper humanity. We are not to do this, because Jesus is the Christ, and that He is come in the flesh ("clothed with flesh": not with a mere seeming humanity, as the Docetæ afterwards taught: He therefore was, previously, something far above flesh).

His flesh implies His death for us, for only by assuming flesh could He die (for as God He could not), Heb 2:9-10,14,16; and His death implies His LOVE for us (Joh 15:13). To deny the reality of His flesh is to deny His love, and so cast away the root which produces all true love on the believer's part (1Jo 4:9-11,19).

Notice Ro 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Ro 8:2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.
Ro 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Ro 8:4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Ro 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

The bible says here in verse 3 that Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh. Now we know that Jesus’ flesh is not sinful for He was and is without sin. We have all sinned but Jesus has never sinned. He came in the same human flesh (human body) that we have. When the bible talks about walking after the flesh in verse 5 it is talking about the sinful nature. When the bible talks about walking after the spirit it is talking about the spiritual nature that we receive when we are born again. Remember in 2Cor. 5:17 it says if any man be in Christ he is a new creature (creation).

I am using JFB commentary to help me.

What does it mean “in the likeness of sinful flesh”--literally, "of the flesh of sin"; a very remarkable and pregnant expression. He was made in the reality of our flesh, but only in the likeness of its sinful condition. He took our nature as it is in us, compassed with infirmities, with nothing to distinguish Him as man from sinful men, save that He was without sin. Nor does this mean that He took our nature with all its properties save one; for sin is no property of humanity at all, but only the disordered state of our souls, as the fallen family of Adam; a disorder affecting, indeed, and overspreading our entire nature, but still purely our own.

What does it mean “and for sin”--literally, "and about sin"; that is, "on the business of sin." The expression is purposely a general one, because the design was not to speak of Christ's mission to atone for sin, but in virtue of that atonement to destroy its dominion and extirpate it altogether from believers.

condemned sin--"condemned it to lose its power over men" [BEZA, BENGEL, FRASER, MEYER, THOLUCK, PHILIPPI, ALFORD]. In this glorious sense our Lord says of His approaching death (Joh 12:31), "Now is the judgment of this world; now shall the prince of this world be cast out," and again (see on Cmt. on Joh 16:11), "When He (the Spirit) shall come, He shall convince the world of . . . judgment, because the prince of this world is judged," that is, condemned to let go his hold of men, who, through the Cross, shall be emancipated into the liberty and power to be holy.
in the flesh--that is, in human nature, henceforth set free from the grasp of sin.

I have mentioned in my other posts concerning sin and sins. I have also mention about the flesh meaning the body and in places it is meaning the sinful nature which Christ never had because He has never sinned.

I am definitely not of the opinion of those who believe that infants will go to hell. We will not go to hell because of Adams sin; we will only go to hell because of our own sins. God is not sending anybody to hell because he is born with a sin nature. We are not going to be judged for our sin nature. We will be judged for the sins we committed unless they have been forgiven and washed away by the blood of Jesus. God in Heaven knows that we are of the nature of Adam after he sinned and that is why he has offered us the free gift in Christ. Salvation is a free gift to the believer. God included us all in Christ when he died on the cross. The death of Christ is the death also for the believer. The bible says the soul that sins shall die, well Christ died for the sins of the whole world.

In summary, to say that Jesus had the same flesh (human body) that we have is correct. To say that Jesus had the same sinful nature that we had is not correct because Jesus is born of God (his Father), he is the Christ from birth meaning anointed one. We only are anointed of the Spirit and receive his spiritual nature when we are born again. This is a miracle of the Love of God that He could do the impossible for us Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
Heb 2:15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

I hope you think that I have given it more consideration of what you were trying to say in your earlier post.

In Christ.

 2008/11/23 17:44Profile









 Re:

rbanks, thank you for responding. This is long and I can summarize points in here if you prefer. I tried to address a lot here.

Quote:
Maybe you think understanding where I'm coming from will mean that "you are a liar and the truth is not in you"?

Please let me explain this a little better. I assumed that you would know where I was coming from because I thought everyone took this verse the same way I did, but I'm starting to see that may not be the case at all. So I owe you an explanation.
This is the actual verse I had in mind: [b]1 John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us.[/b]
I thought that "HAVING" sin meant the "sin nature" and that I would be a heretic if I started questioning it simply because of that verse! But having sin in the context means you sinned before. I didn't see that before and I thought everyone saw it the way I did. It didn't occur to me that there was another way. I was afraid to examine the view that Logic was presenting because according to my interpretation of 1 John it would make me a self-deceived liar to disagree or even question "sin nature". However if there is nothing sinful about flesh then the verse is talking about actual sins instead, which makes more sense regardless. I don't want you to think I was suggesting anything insulting by using the word liar. And I didn't take the time to quote the verse properly because it was all the same thing in my mind. I hope that makes more sense now.
Quote:
I will not try to make God a liar because I know that I have sinned. I’m not trying to make my self out to be a liar by saying that I know Him and not keeping His commandments. I have hid His Word in my Heart that I might not sin against God.

I want you to know I had no intention of saying any of these things about you.
Thank you for trying to understand what I was asking you about. Here is some response to that.
Quote:
I believe I see what you are saying, that you fear that if we were to say that Jesus’ flesh is not the same as ours we would be of the antichrist spirit.

Yes, thank you!
Quote:
This would be wrong to do this, because His flesh is the same as ours, there is no sub-human flesh or different flesh.

Yes! That is what I am saying.
Quote:
His flesh is the same as ours,


YES!
Quote:
there is no sub-human flesh or different flesh.

YES!
When John says "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" He does not specify which type of flesh because there is only one type of mortal flesh.
Quote:
His flesh implies His death for us, for only by assuming flesh could He die (for as God He could not), Heb 2:9-10,14,16; and His death implies His LOVE for us (Joh 15:13). To deny the reality of His flesh is to deny His love, and so cast away the root which produces all true love on the believer's part (1Jo 4:9-11,19).

Beautiful. Exactly. These are the exact verses I have had in mind. You have hit the nail on the head.

I'll address Roman 8 now since you cited it, but I haven't even gotten there yet, I'm still reading through chapter seven and trying to understand.
Quote:
The bible says here in verse 3 that Jesus came in the likeness of sinful flesh.


If someone thinks flesh itself can be sinful, like gnostics, then this part doesn't require any thought at all. But if you understand that flesh itself doesn't sin then you are left with two options as far as I can tell. 1) when it says sinful "flesh", by flesh it could just mean created man. All flesh is like grass, etc. We are flesh. We are sinful, having sinned. Jesus came in our likeness. He became flesh. He was flesh. We are flesh. We have sinned. He did not. The other possibility, remember I'm still learning, is this 2) Since flesh obviously cannot be morally good or bad because it doesn't make decisions, when it calls flesh sinful it is not judging the flesh but showing that it has amoral passions. Jesus' flesh wanted to do things that were unlawful at times and in that sense you could say the unlawful passions are "sinful" but actual sin is only when someone chooses, never because of their ancestry (sour grapes).
Quote:
Now we know that Jesus’ flesh is not sinful for He was and is without sin. We have all sinned but Jesus has never sinned. He came in the same human flesh (human body) that we have.

Exactly. I would rather die than say that Jesus was a sinner. I gave you two possibilities here but I'm only starting to understand some of this and I think Logic could explain it better than I have. Now that you see that no one is saying Jesus is sinful you might have a better time understanding.
Quote:
When the bible talks about walking after the flesh in verse 5 it is talking about the sinful nature.

that's your paradigm, so anything that sounds like it without requiring further examination will seem like proof. But only to you. If the sinful nature just means amoral temptations then yes, walking after the flesh is yielding to unlawful, "sinful" temptations. The body person does not incur blame or guilt on account of this "sinful nature" because that's the way flesh works. It doesn't know any better. Jesus' flesh didn't know any better. He made it obedient to God. Like in the garden when he was praying. His flesh wanted him to disobey his Father. It had "disobedient" desires. Don't misunderstand here. There was no actual sin or wrongdoing. His flesh had "sinful" desires in a sense because it would much rather have napped after the passover supper, bread, wine, singing, etc. like Peter was sleeping. But there is no sin, that's just the nature of flesh. It was never intended to think for itself. We have to think for it and control it, even if it wants to do something sinful.
If, alternately, you mean wanton sin by the sin nature then I would also agree. If your "nature" is to disobey God then you need to get a new "nature" by obeying God. Stop "being a smoker". You don't actually get a new being, you stop smoking, you hate smoking, you never want to smoke, even if your body craves it.
Quote:
When the bible talks about walking after the spirit it is talking about the spiritual nature that we receive when we are born again. Remember in 2Cor. 5:17 it says if any man be in Christ he is a new creature (creation).


Yes but remember, nothing changes about our physical nature. Being born again means this: you repent and follow Jesus. Don't mistake the figurative language for "natural" events. When someone receives the Spirit of adoption they are no longer a worthless clod of dirt that angers God but they are now like the mustard seed that by faith falls into the earth and dies, knowing that God will turn it into a big tree. They are still a human being and still have weak bodies which have unlawful, "sinful" desires. But they let these bodies be buried in the earth, knowing that God will raise them up in glory. The new creation does not change our physical nature nor does it make us have less temptation. Nor our we ever involuntarily made to obey God. When it says in 1 John that a christian cannot sin that doesn't mean that there's anything involuntary going on. I expect you'll agree with most of what I'm saying but I really want to back this "sin nature" thing into a corner and see if there's anything to it.

This is getting closer to the problem here.
Quote:
sin is no property of humanity at all,


True. You might be tempted to think that it is a property of humanity since all of humanity sins. But that is a logical fallacy. Correlation vs Causation. The "cause" is the individual's free choice and there's nothing about the "individuals" that makes it harder for them to obey God than it was for Jesus. We [b]cannot[/b] say that it was easier for Jesus or he would no longer be the sympathetic High Priest in Hebrews.
Quote:
but only the disordered state of our souls

"Our souls" are disordered when we disobey. In the hebrew it says man became a living soul. So man was disordered when he was disobeying. If you disobey, you are being disordered too! It doesn't mean you are genetically predisposed to be disordered. That's like saying someone is born a homosexual or a gambler or a liar. No way. God will judge every soul according to whether it was ordered right with him or disordered against him. Babies don't have disordered souls! That's silly. There's no hidden seed of disorder in babies because that just takes us back to being born a homosexual, liar, etc.
Quote:
as the fallen family of Adam;


We are Adam's descendants. It is appointed to men to die once but we stand or fall based on the "sermon on the mount", our faith in Jesus.
Quote:
a disorder affecting, indeed,


Affecting how? Affecting free will? We either have free will or we don't. We can't just sneak around it. Jesus either experienced the same level of temptation as we did or he didn't. Truly he did. Jesus had the same free will as us. We don't have handicapped souls that make us prone to sin like Balthasar was saying. These are ways to try to explain a doctrine that they wouldn't question in the first place. Since it doesn't make sense, they couldn't understand it and had to come up with these complicated explanations that ignore two basic facts: Jesus experienced the same temptations. We are not influenced toward sin anymore than Jesus was. We chose it. He didn't.
Quote:
and overspreading our entire nature,


Same stuff. This is necessarily vague. "It's in the soul but overspreading our nature," what does that even mean? We are a body that God breathed life into and called a living soul. We have flesh, life, reason, and will. There's no boogieman in our skin, souls, etc that makes us sin. We were the boogiemen. We were the monsters. Because of our choices. Babies are not baby boogiemen. They have the free choice when they are grown. Jesus chose not to be a monster. We all chose to sin and deserve hell.
Quote:
but still purely our own.


Do you think he knows what he's saying? I don't think [b]you[/b] know what he's saying. It just sounds right. The reason I say that is because what he's saying doesn't make any sense. By the time you get to the end of the sentence you forget he said that it was "no property of humanity at all". What kind of non-property infuses the soul and entire nature of something? It's either a choice or a property. We can't dance around it with words. If it's a choice then we're not born with it. If it's a property then Jesus had it also. Unless it's a property that has ZERO affect on our choices and temptations. If it affects out choices then we don't have free wills and it was easier for Jesus to obey than us. If it affects our temptations then Hebrews in wrong.
This kind of definition is typical of religious intellectuals who don't really know what they're talking about. Read through the catholic encyclopedia online. It will be full of similar convoluted and self-contradictory "definitions". That's what happens when you try to define nonsense.

Quote:
We are not going to be judged for our sin nature. We will be judged for the sins we committed unless they have been forgiven

I agree but if we have a "nature" that predisposes us toward sin or makes it difficult, in any way, for us to not sin then Jesus would have had it also. That's why it doesn't make any sense.

Thank you for looking at what I was saying. I think we totally agree but when I started examining the sin nature it just didn't hold up. That means I haven't properly understood the verses that I thought were talking about sin nature. Go figure the majority of them are in Romans. So I haven't properly understood Romans. No surprise. I already knew that when I believed in sin nature.

Ben

 2008/11/23 21:43









 Re:

Hi thingsabove,

I don't think babies have the knowledge of good and evil because they don't have knowledge at all. They develop knowledge but at first it's just sensory input. (I'm glad we get to talk about babies so much in this thread. They are really special.)

Here's the misconception. Just because we sinned doesn't mean that we HAD to sin. Just because everyone sinned, doesn't mean that anyone HAD to sin. Otherwise who could blame us for it? But we are to blame. God hates sin and he's angry at sinners. We deserve hell because we earned it. We didn't HAVE to deserve hell. That's illogical. If someone HAS to deserve something then they don't really deserve it. That's an oxymoron. "Having to deserve something" contradicts itself. Do you understand? It's really simple common sense but all this confusion with the doctrine gets people all mixed up.

I know you have common sense and can see that in your post you've stated that people sin because of something they are born with.

See what I mean?

Also, look at this, Gen 3:22
Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil...

Ben

 2008/11/23 21:57









 Re:

Hi Taylor,
I'm concerned that you may be longing more for yourself to be vindicated and that you might refuse to hear anything I'm saying.

Quote:
Let's follow your own advice and pull the book back some and look at the rest of the passage to see if we can get some clarity for what Paul is saying.

Let's take a look at Romans 5:19:

For as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous. (Romans 5:19)

Let me highlight a few things:

For as [b]by the one man’s disobedience[/b][u][i](cause)[/i][/u][b]the many were made sinners[/b] [u][i](effect)[/i][/u], so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.

This verse plainly states that our sin (and being sinners) is directly related to Adam's sin. For it is by his disobedience that we were made sinners (Paul's words - not mine).

Likewise, Paul goes on to state that our righteousness is directly (and solely) related to Christ's obedience - through the substitutionary work upon the cross as a propitiation for his people.

All men by natural birth are imputed with the sin of Adam; all men who are spiritually born again by the Spirit of God are imputed with the righteousness of Christ.

I assume you do not believe Paul must be mistaken at this point in his letter? For he clearly states that because of Adam's disobedience, many were made sinners, which you have on numerous occasions called "unjust".

Longing for the truth to be vindicated,
Taylor



[b]No.[/b] You're getting colder so to speak.

Quote:
he clearly states that because of Adam's disobedience, many were made sinners, which you have on numerous occasions called "unjust".

Nothing Paul [b]wrote[/b] was unjust. Your [b]idea[/b] of what Paul meant is unjust. You haven't pulled the book back at all, you just moved it over a few inches and proceeded with the same methods of misinterpretation. You could probably do this with a William Shakespeare play. I'll explain.

Quote:
Let me highlight a few things:
For as [b]by the one man’s disobedience[/b][u][i](cause)[/i][/u][b]the many were made sinners[/b] [u][i](effect)[/i][/u], so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.


Here's the first mistake. Before you digested the first three words of the verse [b]"For as by"[/b] you were already making theological conclusions based on the first half of the figure Paul is building. Your conclusions are contrary to God's word. Nobody is disobedient because of someone else. God will not accept that. Even a wicked judge probably couldn't accept that. They'd have to falsify evidence or something. It's totally contrary to reason, common sense, the English language and Scripture. No one made you a sinner. Not Adam. Not Eve. Not the serpent. Not God. Not inanimate flesh. Only [b]your[/b] own choices. [b]You[/b] are responsible. [b]You[/b] are in trouble with God. [b]You[/b] need to do something about it. He's already paved the path. [b]You[/b] need to change because [b]you[/b] made yourself a sinner. You sinned. You repent. Take responsibility. Until you understand that and don't have excuses like Adam made you a sinner you'll never be able to understand what Paul is saying.
Quote:
This verse plainly states that our sin (and being sinners) is directly related to Adam's sin.

I agree with you here. But not the way you think because it contradicts reason. You are right though, Paul is purposely relating Adam's disobedience to our disobedience in order to make a bigger picture. That doesn't at all mean that Adam made us disobey. It's a figure.
He's saying, in the same way that Adam's sin is directly related to our sin, so is Christ's obedience directly related to our obedience.
If Jesus [b]forced[/b] people to be obedient then it would make sense to see it your way. If the obedience of faith is voluntary, then the disobedience of unbelief is voluntary. If Adam caused us to involuntarily sin, the Jesus caused men to involuntarily obey. That's not true at all and contrary to the gospel.

Quote:
For it is by his disobedience that we were made sinners (Paul's words - not mine).


Paul's words, but the book is still too close to the face so to speak.

Quote:
Likewise, Paul goes on to state that our righteousness is directly (and solely) related to Christ's obedience - through the substitutionary work upon the cross as a propitiation for his people.

Righteousness is by faith in Jesus. Faith obeys. It is voluntary. Faith is a voluntary gift. We don't make it true, God made it true. We just choose to believe because the alternative is to say God is a liar. There's no magic to it. It's the gift of righteousness and it produces obedience by nature.
Quote:
All men by natural birth are imputed with the sin of Adam;

No. That's like double jeopardy or something. Even american courts aren't that unjust.
Quote:
all men who are spiritually born again by the Spirit of God are imputed with the righteousness of Christ.

Yes because being born again includes and can't happen without a voluntary choice to believe God and stop pretending he is a liar, that he doesn't exist, that he won't punish our sins, etc.

Summary:
This is basically what [i]Logic[/i] has spelled out in a previous post. You can understand it if you follow the train of thought.

[b]JUST AS[/b] (in the same way)

[b]"by" Adam[/b] (not because of Adam, because we did what Adam did, we "followed" Adam. He didn't make us sin, that's the sour grapes thing)

[b]many were "made" sinners[/b] (again, you can't throw out the rest of scripture just because Paul is speaking figuratively. Job said he led a widow from when he was born but that's not literally what he meant. We were "made" sinners because we made ourselves sin by following Adam's disobedience. Not Adam's fault. Our fault.)

[b]SO[/b] (just as by Adam, [u]so[/u] by Christ)

[b]"BY" Christ[/b] (just as [u]voluntarily[/u] following Adam's example [through unbelief] made us sinners so will [u]voluntarily[/u] following Christ's example [through faith] make us righteous.)

[b]so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous.[/b] (Christ doesn't force anyone to obey him. We have to choose. God wants us to choose. He wants sons, not pets.)

Ben

 2008/11/23 23:01
crsschk
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA

 Re: Dead in trespasses and sins

Quote:
If someone thinks flesh itself can be sinful, like gnostics, then this part doesn't require any thought at all.



Rom 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Or like Paul?

[b]Flesh

G4561[/b]
σάρξ
sarx
[i]sarx[/i]

Probably from the base of G4563; [i]flesh[/i] (as [i]stripped[/i] of the skin), that is, (strictly) the [i]meat[/i] of an animal (as food), or (by extension) the [i]body[/i] (as opposed to the soul (or spirit), or as the symbol of what is external, or as the means of kindred, or (by implication) [i]human nature[/i] (with its frailties (physically or morally) and passions), or (specifically) a [i]human being[/i] (as such): - carnal (-ly, + -ly minded), flesh ([-ly]).



Time to turn the question around;

Can you prove that human nature is not sinful?


"The flesh" has far more implications than the body suit we wear in scripture. Or for that matter what Jesus came walking in.

Quote:
there is no sub-human flesh or different flesh.

YES!

When John says "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh" He does not specify which type of flesh because there is only one type of mortal flesh.



[i] All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.

Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.[/i] 1Co 15:39-50

In these verses alone there is much to refute this proposition that there is no such thing as a nature that is sinful ... Notice the difference just by changing the order of those two words?

"It is sown in dishonor"

"The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven."

"As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy:"

Jesus had a different [i]nature[/i] condescended into a sinful, 'earthy' body. There is a lot of playing around with words where the definitions are lacking.

[i]Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption[/i]

A direct correlation of two matters. Flesh and blood. Corruption\incorruption. What is it that is corrupt?

Temptation. How can one be disposed, to be inclined or 'stimulated' as it was so put to do anything against ones own will if it is all simply a matter of preference? What makes one tempted at all?

[i]But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.[/i] Jas 1:14

His own lust ... from where did it come from?

[i]I want. I will. I must have. I desire. I covet ...[/i]

[i]From whence come wars and fightings among you? come they not hence, even of your lusts that war in your members?[/i] Jas 4:1




All throughout the scriptures and this is where I am finding a great deal of problem with this whole construct is a constant revealing of what the flesh [i]is[/i], that there is no good thing [i]in[/i] it, that it is debased and reprobate, the heart desperately wicked so much so that no one can know it, the tongue that no man came tame, the thoughts, imaginations, the constant references to dying to ones-self, to mortifying the [i]body[/i]. The whole of it.

[i]Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.[/i] Isa 1:5

The scriptures not only teach but prove that human nature is not inherently good in any such fashion. There is so much that could be developed that we would soon be through the entirety of the scriptures.

Think about it. What is the point of being redeemed, of being saved in the first place. From what? Your poor decisions? Your wrong reactions to stimulus? Your accidents?

[i] And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.[/i] Luk 13:2,3


Though it was rather long, there is a lot explanation in the commentary provided earlier. Adam, what he brought, what he wrought, what passed unto all men. We have a [i]bent[/i] that is still quite evident even in our discussions and discourses. [i]Wretched man that I am. In my flesh I find no good thing.[/i] We can be disheveled, agitated, mean one thing and say another, say one thing and mean another. Totally depraved? Or just partially? What is the difference if only a little leaven is all that it takes? Paul bemoaned himself for not finding that [i]which for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.[/i].

I do not believe any of this has even scratched the surface; The [i]penalty[/i] of death, what [i]death[/i] is, [i]means[/i];


[i]It is the commonness of death, which deprives it
of its extreme dreadfulness. If death happened in
our world only once in a century, it would be felt
like the shock of an earthquake; and would hush
the inhabitants of earth into a breathless silence,
while the echoes of the knell of the departed soul
were reverberating around the globe![/i]

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=14907&forum=45&post_id=&refresh=Go]Death awaits[/url]

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=12137&forum=34&post_id=&refresh=Go]Understanding Mortification[/url]


_________________
Mike Balog

 2008/11/24 0:17Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Affiliate Disclosure | Privacy Policy