SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Looking for free sermon messages?
Sermon Podcast | Audio | Video

Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Is The Flesh Sinful? Is The Body A Sin?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 Next Page )
PosterThread
Logic
Member



Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791


 Re:

Quote:

TaylorOtwell wrote:
Logic,

I think the pertinent point in this thread is not whether Pelagius was correctly or incorrectly labeled a heretic, but rather the meaning of Paul's teaching in Ephesians 2:3.

I know, but TrueWitness was trying to find some "dirt" on truefaithsav.

When ever anyone can't refute the doctrine of someone, they always revert to mudslinging.

All I was doing is defending truefaithsav by proving that he was no heretic.

 2009/10/27 22:31Profile









 Re:




To murrcolr:

The tragedy is that truthfaithsave will not even answer what have posted, verse by verse. He will continue to repost what he always does. The result, his position on this issue does not have the support of the full counsel of God (i.e.-- the entire Bible, with all of it's many references to this same issue).

I would like to post your post again, and see where it goes:


Quote:

[color=990000][b]murrcolr wrote:

truefaithsav

David wrote in Psalm 51:5, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.” (NASB). The NIV’s translation is even clearer. “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”

In Psalm 58:3 David wrote, “Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.”

Then note Paul’s statement in Eph. 2:1-3, “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.” (NIV)

Note two important points here: First, speaking about his readers’ former life (a statement which applies to all of us before salvation) he states they were dead in their transgressions and sins and as a result they followed the ways of the world. Following the sinful ways of the world and the typical lusts patterns of men is the product of spiritual death; the issue of root to fruit. Men sin because they are sinners.

Second, he shows this sinful condition and a further consequence, being under the wrath of God, is “by nature,” a condition received by nature, i.e., inherited from our parents, just as David pointed out in Ps. 51:5.

This is further supported by Paul’s statements in Romans 5. Though this passage is dealing with the imputation of Adam’s sin as the federal head of the human race, it also shows us man is sinful because of his relation to Adam.

12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—13 for until the Law sin was in the world; but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.

15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification. 17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. 18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.

The point is, after Adam sinned, he and his descendants could only beget sinners, so all men are under the sentence of death, the penalty of sin (see Heb. 7:9-10 for the principle of imputation).

In essence then, all men are behind the eight ball or constituted a sinners for three reasons:

Inherited Sin: They are sinners by nature; possessing an inherited sinful nature Ps. 51:5; 58:3 and see also Gen. 5:3

Imputed Sin: They are sinners by imputation Adam’s sin is imputed to man’s account Rom. 5:12 just as Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us when we believe in Christ.

Individual Sin: They are personal sinners; all men sin as individuals since they posses a sinful nature. Even in a godly environment children naturally are selfish and tend to tell lies, etc. Rom. 3:23[/color][/b]




Best regards,

Walter

 2009/10/27 22:49









 Re:

I can explain the proof texts you guys use for the notion of being "born sinful", but can you guys answer the explicit passages I have given which teach that our flesh is not sinful? I don't think so.

Here is my explaination of the common proof texts for the idea that you are born a sinner:

[b]I. "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." Ps. 51:5:[/b]

A. This scripture is talking about David and his mother. It is not referencing all of humanity. It says nothing about Adam.

B. The event spoke of is the conception of David, not the birth of David. He is not saying that he was born a sinner, he is saying that his mother was in sin when she conceived him. The conception is the beginning of the pregnancy, the birth is the end of the pregnancy. This passage is talking about the beginning of the pregnancy, the conception.

C. A strong case can be made that Ps. 51:5 is talking about the defilement of David’s mother, because of a previous marriage to another man – a heathen.

(1.) David had two half-sisters named Zeruiah and Abigail (1 Chron. 2:13-16).

(2.) The father of David’s half sisters was not Jesse but Nahash (2 Sam. 17:25).

(3.) Nahash was an Ammonite king (1 Sam. 11:1; 1 Sam. 12:12).

(4.) David’s father was Jesse, not Nahash. But the Father of David’s half sisters were daughts of Nahash. This could explain why Nahash showed kindness towards David (2 Sam. 10:2).

(5.) David’s mother was most likely the second wife of Jesse. The first wife of Jesse would have been considered superior to his second wife which had been either the concubine or wife of a heathen king.

(6.) This would explain why David’s half brothers viewed themselves as superior to David, and why David was considered prideful for thinking he was as good as them (1 Sam. 17:28-30).

(7.) This may explain why David was not called before Samuel the prophet amongst the other sons (1 Sam. 16:11).

(8.) David’s mother apparently had a good relationship with the Lord (Ps. 86:16; 116:16). But she would have been, in the eyes of Jewish law, considered defiled by her previous relationship with an Ammonite (Num. 25:1,2; Deut. 7:3,4; 1 Kings 11:2-4, Ezra 9:2; Neh. 13:23,25; 2 Cor. 6:14-17).

D. The context of David’s prayer of repentance is not consistent with David making an excuse for his adultery, “I was born this way”. In true repentance, an individual takes full responsible for their sin, offering no excuses for justification. David was not blaming his sin on his birth. David was simply stating that even the circumstances of his birth were surrounded by sexual sin.

E. David said that he was “wonderfully” and “marvelously” made by God in the womb (Ps. 139:13-14). Therefore, he could not have been sinfully made by his mother in the womb. It is not wonderful to be born sinful or marvelous to be created evil.

[b]II. "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies." Ps. 58:3:[/b]

A. This is a poetic book which verses can be taken figuratively or literally.

B. The context of this passage requires a figurative interpretation.

(1.) The entire chapter is figurative; the surrounding verses are all poetic. It talks of men being like serpents and deaf adders (vs. 4), of God breaking the teeth of the young lions (vs. 6), men melting away like running water (vs.7), God bending his bow to shoot arrows (vs. 7), men passing away as a snail which melts (vs. 8), and God destroying like a whirlwind (vs. 9).

(2.) It says that children speak lies from the womb.

(3.) Infants do not know how to speak as soon as they are born.

(4.) Therefore, this passage is poetic not realistic; it is figurative not literal.

C. The obvious meaning of this passage is that individuals choose to sin at a very early age, from the dawn of their moral agency, and the first sin which children usually commit is lying.

[b]III. "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil." Jeremiah 13:23[/b]

A. This passage is talking about Israel during a certain period of time in their history. This passage is not talking about all sinners of all time. To apply this passage to all sinners of all time is to ignore the proper rules of hermeneutic interpretation, particularly context.

B. This passage is not talking about the way Israel was born. This passage is talking about the way Israel had become through their self-chosen habitual manner of life. The unchanging state of these people was a moral condition by choice, not a constitutional condition by birth.

C. Israel had resisted God for a long time. These men disobeyed God continually, after God had been reaching out to them time and time again. But despite all of the efforts of God, they were still wicked and evil. In fact, they were worst than when they started, because they had to continually harden their hearts as God was reaching out to them. They were well accustomed in doing evil.

D. They were so accustomed to do evil that their reformation would be comparable to a leopard changing his spots or an Ethiopian changing his skin. Through their habitual choice of disobedience, they made themselves reprobates. They resisted the influence of God to the point of no return. It was as likely to see an Ethiopian changing his skin, or a leopard changing his spots, as it would be to see these hardened reprobates changing their moral ways.

E. This passage was given to show Israel that they were without excuse, not with excuse. If they were born evil, or had no choice, they would have an excuse for being evil. God was revealing to them the justice of their punishment (Jer. 13:21-22). They rightly deserved punishment because of their continual disobedience, because of their voluntary and well established custom in doing evil.

[b]IIII. “For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.” Romans 5:19:[/b]

A. If we are going to apply the first section of the passage unconditionally and universally, we must also apply the second section of the passage unconditionally and universally, since the language for both is the same. If the first section means mankind is universally and unconditionally condemned in Adam, then the second section would mean that mankind is universally and unconditionally justified through Jesus.

B. By Adam’s disobedience of eating from the tree, Adam provided all mankind with the opportunity of choosing to be sinners, since moral knowledge has been granted to all men. A sinner is an individual who voluntarily chooses contrary to their moral knowledge. The result of one man’s disobedience (eating from the tree of knowledge) was that many were made sinners (men have chosen to be sinners).

C. By Christ’s obedience of hanging on the tree, Christ has provided all mankind with the opportunity of choosing to be saved, since remission of sin has been offered to all men upon condition of their repentance and faith.

D. The word “made” used in these passages is not referring to a constitutional change, but referring to a conditional position which requires the consent of the will. Being a sinner is conditional upon choosing to sin. Likewise, being justified is conditional upon choosing to repent and believe.

E. This passage is not teaching that we contributed to Adam’s sin, but that Adam contributed to our sin. It says by Adam’s actions we have become sinners (We have chosen to sin).

[b]V. “…by nature children of wrath” Ephesians 2:3:[/b]

A. The word nature can describe a man’s God given constitution: (Rom 1:26; 1:31; 2:14; 2:27; 2 Tim 3:3). But this is just dirt and it is created by God. Therefore it cannot be sinful in and of itself.

B. The word nature can describe a man’s self chosen character, custom, habit, or manner of life: (Jer. 13:23; Acts 26:4; 1 Cor 2:14; Eph 2:2-3; Gal 2:14-15; 2 Tim 3:10; 2 Pet 1:4). This is voluntary and has to do with the heart. Therefore moral character, or sinfulness, can belong to this type of nature.

C. The context of this particular passage is talking about a former manner of life, addressing a previous lifestyle. "Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world... among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of the flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind..." Eph. 2:2-3. The “natural man” is the same as the “carnally minded”. It is someone who lives for the gratification of their flesh. To say that a person is by nature a child of wrath is the same as saying that they are under the wrath of God because they are living for the gratification of their flesh.

D. To say that they are “children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2, 5:6) and “by nature children of wrath” is to say the same thing.

E. That which brings the “wrath” of God is voluntary moral character, not involuntary constitutions.

F. A sinful nature is moral not physical, it is a person’s self chosen character and not his God given constitution. A man’s heart (will) can be sinful, but a man’s body can only be an occasion of temptation. Though continual choices of self-gratification, man has developed a habit of sin.


Now can you guys explain these passages??

Quote:
1. God is the author of our flesh (Exodus 4:11, Isaiah 44:2, Jer. 1:5).

2. Sinfulness is violation of God’s law (1 Jn. 3:4). God’s law tells us what type of choices we should and shouldn’t make (Exo. 20:3-17), not what type of body or nature we should or shouldn’t have.

3. Our flesh is just dirt (Gen. 2:7, Gen. 3:19).

4. Our flesh is the occasion of our sin, or the source of temptation (James 1:14), but sin itself is a choice (John 5:14, John 8:11, Rom. 6:12; Rom. 6:19 Eph. 4:26).

5. The body needs to be kept under subjection (1 Corinthians 9:27).

6. It is sinful to live after the flesh (Rom. 8:13), or to be living to gratify our flesh (Rom. 8:7).

7. But it is not sinful to have a flesh, because Jesus Christ had a flesh (Luke 24:39, John 1:14, 1 Tim. 3:16, 1 Jn. 4:3, 2 Jn. 1:7).

8. Jesus had the same type of flesh that we have (Heb. 2:14; Heb. 2:17).

9. Jesus made in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom. 8:3) which means Jesus was made in the likeness of men (Philippians 2:7). The word “flesh” is sometimes used synonymous with men (Gen. 6:12, Matt. 16:17).

10. Jesus was morally perfect (2 Cor. 5:21) before He had a glorified or resurrected body.

11. The Gnostic’s taught that the flesh was sinful in and of itself (1 Jn. 4:3, 2 Jn. 1:7).

12. Our flesh is an instrument or tool which we could use for sin or for righteousness (Rom. 6:13, Rom. 6:19).

13. Our flesh can be sanctified (Rom. 12:1, 1 Thes. 4:4, 1 Thes. 5:23, 1 Tim. 2:8).

 2009/10/27 23:44
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

If we are not born sinners, and sin is merely a choice, and not something in our nature, then why has all of mankind universally chosen to sin since Adam? Why have ALL SINNED and fallen short the glory of God?


_________________
Jimmy H

 2009/10/27 23:51Profile









 Re:

This is my own personal study regarding the born sinner fallacy vs. The full counsel of God's Word:

1. Children do not inherit the guilt or sin of the parent: Deut. 24:16,2 Kng. 14:6, 2 Chron. 25:4, Jer. 31:29-30, Eze. 18:2-4, Eze. 18:19-20.

2. Sinners are separated from God for their own sin: Isa. 59:2; Lk. 15:24; Rom. 5:12; Rom. 7:9, Col. 2:13.

3. Responsibility is limited to or exactly proportionate to ability: Deut. 6:5, Deut. 10:12, Deut. 30:6, Matt. 22:37, Mk. 12:30, Lk. 10:27, 1 Cor. 10:13.

4. Accountability is limited to or exactly proportionate to knowledge: Matt. 11:21-22, Lk. 12:47-48, Lk. 23:34, Jn. 9:41, Jn. 15:22, Rom. 4:15, Rom. 5:13, Jas. 4:17, Jn. 19:11, Matt. 23:14, Mk.12:40, Lk. 20:47, Jas. 3:1, Matt. 10:15, Matt. 11:24, Mk. 6:11, Lk. 10:12, Lk. 10:14, Heb. 10:26, 2 Pet. 2:21.

5. Through Adams leading, influence, and example men choose to become sinners: Rom. 5:12, Rom. 5:19. Men choose to sin like Adam: Hos. 6:7. Adam has also opened up our eyes to good and evil (Gen. 3:22). With this knowledge we have all chosen to be sinners (Rom. 3:23), we have all chosen to do what we know to be wrong (Jas. 4:17).

6. Someone’s leading, influence, or example can cause others to choose to sin: 1 Kng. 14:16; 15:26, 30, 34; 16:13, 26; 21:22; 22:52; 2 Kng. 3:3; 10:29, 31; 13:2; 14:24; 15:9, 18, 24, 28; 21:11, 16; 23:15, Neh. 13:26, Jer. 32:35, Isa. 3:12, Matt. 18:6; Mk. 9:42; Lk. 17:2, 1 Cor. 8:9, Heb. 4:11.

7. Each individual is personally accountable for their own personal sins only: Deut. 24:16, 2 Kng. 14:6, 2 Chron. 25:4, Eze. 18:2-4, Eze. 18:19-20, Matt. 16:27, 2 Cor. 5:10, 2 Cor. 11:15, 1 Pet. 1:17, Rev. 22:12.

8. Men are not born dead in sins, they become morally depraved and relationally separated from God when they voluntarily choose to sin: Isa. 59:2, Lk. 15:24; Rom. 5:12, Rom. 5:14, Rom. 7:9, Rom. 7:11, Col. 2:13.


9. All men have personally and voluntarily chosen to become sinners: Gen. 6:12, Ex. 32:7, Deut. 9:12, Deut. 32:5, Jdg. 2:19, Hos. 9:9, Ps. 14:2-3, Isa. 53:6, Ecc. 7:29, Rom. 3:23, Rom. 5:12

10. Each individual originates their own sin out of their own heart: Matt. 12:35, Lk. 6:45.

11. Infant children are morally innocent (2 Kng. 21:16; 24:4; Jer. 13:26-27; Ps. 106:37-38; Matt. 18:3) and have not yet “done anything” morally “good or evil” (Rom. 9:11) until the age of accountability, which is the age of reason, when they know right from wrong (Deut. 1:39; Isa. 7:15-16), and choose to do wrong (Jas. 4:17).

12. God forms us in the womb (Gen. 4:1; Ex. 4:11; Isa. 27:11; 43:7; 49:5; 64:8; Jer. 1:5; Ps. 139:13-14, 16; Ecc. 7:29; Job 10:9-11; 31:15; 35:10; Jn. 1:3).

13. God forms us in His image, so even after the fall of Adam man is made in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27; 9:6; 1 Cor. 11:7; Jas 3:9).

14. Even after the fall of Adam, mankind continued to have free choice (Gen. 4:6-7; Deut. 30:11, 19; Josh. 24:15; Isa. 1:16-20; 55:6-7; Jer. 4:14; Hos. 10:12; Jer. 18:11; 21:8; 26:13; Eze. 18:30-32; 20:7-8; Acts 2:40; 17:30; Rom. 6:17; 2 Cor. 7:1; 2 Tim. 2:21; Jas. 4:7-10; 1 Pet. 1:22; Rev. 22:17). God calls all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30-31) and He rightly blames them if they do not repent (Matt. 11:20; 23:37; Mk. 6:6; Lk. 7:30; 13:34; 14:17-18; 19:14; 19:27; Jn. 5:40; Rev. 2:21). The only thing that keeps men back from God is their own unwillingness of heart, not any inability of their nature (Isa. 30:9; 30:15; 30:16; Jer. 8:5; Eze. 20:7-8; Matt. 11:20-21; 23:37, Mk. 6:6; 7:30; 13:34; 14:17-18; 19:14; 19:27; Lk. 14:16-24 ;Jn. 5:40; Acts 7:51; 17:27; Rev. 2:21).

 2009/10/27 23:56
roaringlamb
Member



Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 1519
Santa Cruz California

 Re:

Quote:
III. "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil." Jeremiah 13:23

A. This passage is talking about Israel during a certain period of time in their history. This passage is not talking about all sinners of all time. To apply this passage to all sinners of all time is to ignore the proper rules of hermeneutic interpretation, particularly context.



Man you are a piece of work to say the least!

It amazes me how you will use this argument to hold your view, BUT then turn right around an quote from Ezekiel to try to prove your view?

If I am not mistaken, Ezekiel was speaking to God's covenant people for the most part, with the exceptions of the warnings and woes to Babylon, Egypt etc.

Come on man at least be consistent if you're you going to make us all wade through your pontifications on nothing.

And in reference to your defense of Pelagius, I suppose that Charles Tayes Russell was misunderstood too, and Mary Baker Eddy, and heck I'm sure that Arius was just misunderstood too. Poor folks, we should just accept everyone who says they believe the Bible I guess.

That's my ONE post for this topic, and it will remain ONE because you have no interest in dialogue if it doesn't allow you to cram your false beliefs down our throats.


_________________
patrick heaviside

 2009/10/28 0:01Profile









 Re:

Quote:
If we are not born sinners, and sin is merely a choice, and not something in our nature, then why has all of mankind universally chosen to sin since Adam? Why have ALL SINNED and fallen short the glory of God?



I could just say that it is the "mystery of iniquity" but I think it might be better to give a practical answer.

[b]These are some answers I have compiled over the years: [/b]

1. From Charles Finney
2. From Gordon Olson
3. From Winkie Pratney
4. From Michael & Debi Pearl


[b]FROM CHARLES FINNEY:[/b]

2. All moral depravity commences in substantially the same way.
Proof:

(1.) The impulses of the sensibility are developed, and gradually commencing from the birth, and depending on physical development and birth.

(2.) The first acts of will are in obedience to these.

(3.) Self-gratification is the rule of action previous to the developement of reason.

(4.) No resistance is offered to the will's indulgence of appetite, until a habit of self-indulgence is formed.

(5.) When reason affirms moral obligation, it finds the will in a state of habitual and constant committal to the impulses of the sensibility.

(6.) The demands of the sensibility have become more and more despotic every hour of indulgence.

(7.) In this state of things, unless the Holy Spirit interpose, the idea of moral obligation will be but dimly developed.

(8.) The will of course rejects the bidding of reason, and cleaves to self-indulgence.

(9.) This is the settling of a fundamental, question. It is deciding in favour of appetite, against the claims of conscience and of God.

(10.) Light once rejected, can be afterwards more easily resisted, until it is nearly excluded altogether.

(11.) Selfishness confirms, and strengthens, and perpetuates itself by a natural process. It grows with the sinner's growth, and strengthens with his strength; and will do so for ever, unless overcome by the Holy Spirit through the truth,

(Lectures on Systematic Theology, page 345-346)


[b]FROM GORDON OLSON:[/b]

THE UNIVERSALITY OF SIN IN THE WORLD IS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR AS FOLLOWS:

1. Hereditary physical tendencies tend toward softness and self-sympathy, beginning early in life....

2. Physical consciousness and experiences through the five senses are cultivated prior to the dawn of moral accountability.

3. Moral influences of our immediate and social environment lead us to choose similar habits of life by imitation and often persuasion (I Pe. 1:18).

4. At the dawn of moral accountability, as obligation to God and other beings is beginning to be perceived, moral enlightenment appears to make a dim impact because of our already established manner of living.

5. The will now determines to press on in this self-gratification against these new realizations, the habit of self -indulgence now becoming sinful and involves new concentrations in its pursuit (Is.
53:6; Ro. 3:23; I Pe. 2:25).

(The Truth Shall Set You Free, page 79-80)


[b]FROM WINKIE PRATNEY:[/b]

WHY DO CHILDREN SIN?

How, then does a child sin! One does not have to teach a child to do wrong. The explanation becomes clear if we carefully consider the development of a man. A baby enters the world as the object of its parent's fondness, unceasing care, and concession by those who guard it. In these circumstances, the natural, inherited appetites are Just developed; and the child's natural love of conscious freedom begins to express itself. The feelings develop long before the reason, and both are deeply entrenched before the spirit begins to awaken to the claims of God. Much depends at this point on the parents. If they are faithful in their duty to God, they must train their child to yield up its own way when that self- willed way will interfere with the happiness of others. The child will learn at first obedience to its parents only in a love/discipline relationship; it is here that the habit of response to authority must be ingrained in the child's soul, so that later, when God opens up the spiritual understanding, the child will surrender to Him (1 Samuel 15:22; Proverbs 6:20-2 3; 10: 17; 13:18; 15:5;31-32; Ephesians 6: 1; Colossians 3:20).

Since the feelings develop before the reason and conscience, the will begins to form the habit of obeying desire, which deepens every day. The obvious consequence is that self indulgence becomes the master principle in the soul of the child long before it can understand that this self-indulgence will interfere with the right or happiness of others.

This repeated bias grows, stronger each day before a knowledge of right or duty could possibly have entered the mind. Finally, the moment of true moral responsibility arrives.

The child is now old enough to understand wrong. (This will probably be earlier in a Christian home than in a non-Christian one.) Does the child approach this test in a perfectly neutral state? If Adam, in the maturity of his reason, with full consciousness of the morality of his actions could give in to such temptation, is there any doubt that a child will not? The moment that child chooses selfishly, it sins. From this point on (and NOT before) God holds the child responsible for its own actions and destiny. It is significant that all words of the Lord to sinners begin FROM THEIR YOUTH, and NOT from birth, as some have supposed.

(Youth Aflame, page 89-90)

[b]FROM MICHAEL & DEBI PEARL[/b]

“God created us to exist in a constant state of desire and appetite… The infant cannot think of terms of duty, responsibility, or moral choice…. The self-centeredness of infants has all the appearances of a vice. But they are acting on natural, God-given impulses to survive and seek their own pleasure…. They do not have the intellectual and moral capacity to say “No” to appetites and impulses. They cannot yet be held responsible. They begin life in innocent self-centeredness…. But the growing child or adult who doesn’t rise above self-indulging desires has fallen from God’s intention and design. The root of all sin is founded in runaway indulgence of God-given desires… Drives which are not in themselves evil, nonetheless, form the seedbed on which sin will assuredly grow… When does this innocent, natural selfishness of a child become sin? In other words, when is a child to blame? Keep in mind that a child will not come under condemnation until his moral faculties are fully operative… When a child goes against his conscience, however limited and incomplete his understanding may be, he is then guilty. The degree to which his understanding has developed is the degree to which his actions can be called sin…. As the body of flesh was the medium of Eve’s sin and of Christ’s temptation, so it is the implement of your child’s development into selfishness – which, at maturity, will constitute sinfulness.” Michael & Debi Pearl (To Train Up A Child, No Greater Joy, pg. 15-20)

 2009/10/28 0:12
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Quote:


C. A strong case can be made that Ps. 51:5 is talking about the defilement of David’s mother, because of a previous marriage to another man – a heathen.



Even if your conjecture is true, that David's mother was previously wed to an Ammonite king (which showing a direct linkage is not possible, and it is more likely that the typical scenario of polygamy would be most likely), this would not be the contextual cause for David to make this statement he did in Psalm 51. Based off the immediate context of the Psalm, such a consideration is not a viable clue to rightly interpreting this passage. Almost everything we need to interpret this Psalm, as with most Psalms, is supplied right here within the Psalm itself.

The point David is trying to make in Psalm 51 is that his life has been one marked by the taint of sin from conception even to this very moment. His point is that he personally has a history with sin, and this history extends all the way back to the moment he was conceived. Contextually, he is talking about his own dealings with sin. He's not talking about whether or not his mother sinned in his conception. For he's not confessing his mother's sins. Whether, this Psalm is a psalm in which David is confessing his own sin. He's humbling himself before the Lord, and owning up to his sin, the sin which has plagued him since the womb, to which he pleads to the Lord for mercy and to be washed anew.

And his history with sin has taught him that this is a problem in a condition and nature, and a corrupt heart. Such is why he prays to the Lord, "Create in me a clean heart." He realizes that the Lord must ultimately deal with his heart if He is to deal with David's sin.

Thus, your dancing around in Psalm 51, which is a pretty straight forward and easy to read Psalm, is frankly, entirely unwarranted, and harmful to sound exegesis.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2009/10/28 0:14Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Quote:

I could just say that it is the "mystery of iniquity" but I think it might be better to give a practical answer.



All of these answers tap dance around the heart of the issue, and don't really offer any real insight into why all mankind since Adam has universally chosen to sin without exception. We live in a world full of many exceptions. Very odd things out of the ordinary happen all of the time. Billions upon billions of people have populated this world at some point or another, some, who were even so blessed to have been born into the covenant made with Abraham and Israel, who had a godly raising from very early on. Yet, without exception, ALL HAVE SINNED.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2009/10/28 0:22Profile
KingJimmy
Member



Joined: 2003/5/8
Posts: 4419
Charlotte, NC

 Re:

Quote:

II. "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies." Ps. 58:3:

A. This is a poetic book which verses can be taken figuratively or literally.

B. The context of this passage requires a figurative interpretation.

(1.) The entire chapter is figurative; the surrounding verses are all poetic. It talks of men being like serpents and deaf adders (vs. 4), of God breaking the teeth of the young lions (vs. 6), men melting away like running water (vs.7), God bending his bow to shoot arrows (vs. 7), men passing away as a snail which melts (vs. 8), and God destroying like a whirlwind (vs. 9).

(2.) It says that children speak lies from the womb.

(3.) Infants do not know how to speak as soon as they are born.

(4.) Therefore, this passage is poetic not realistic; it is figurative not literal.



Again, you have no idea whatsoever of what you are talking about. Part of interpreting the Scriptures correctly is identifying literary devices when they are used, and rightly understanding what they are pointing to. For whatever figurative language they may employ, they are talking about a definite subject matter, and conveying truths that are quite literal. Psalm 58, like Psalm 51, is a pretty easy Psalm to interpret.

Psalm 58 simply accuses unrighteous judges of being wicked, and asks God for justice in regard to them. In verse 2, the Psalmist declares that these judges are corrupt in their hearts, and in verse 3: "The wicked are estranged from the womb; These who speak lies go astray from birth." By saying this, the Psalmist shows that these wicked judges have always been wicked. He shows, like in Psalm 51, that these wicked judges who are wicked from their heart have been wicked from the womb. Sin is simply a part of who they are, the Psalmist says.

In verse 4, the Psalmist compares them to venomous animals who poison and kill those they prey on. These men are like that the author says. In verses 6-9, the Psalmist prays for God's divine retribution and justice to fall on these men, for which he said, those who are righteous will rejoice over such justice when it finally falls.

So, you see, this Psalm is far from some sort of undiscernable confusing metaphors that you can simply dismiss because they are metaphors. It's a very simple and straight forward Psalm that just about anybody should be able to interpret. Don't be a coward. Engage the text, and let it bring forth it's own interpretation.

But, you are not interested in doing that. Instead, you proof text random Scriptures that you've compiled through search engines, and make them say whatever you want them to say, instead of simply drawing out these things through careful, methodical and systematic exegesis.


_________________
Jimmy H

 2009/10/28 0:40Profile





©2002-2019 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy