|
Post by ejuliot on Feb 13, 2006 19:24:59 GMT -5
To anybody: Romans 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned..."
Romans 6:23 "For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord."
If sin is what causes death then why do babies die (if they do not have sin)? I can understand the arguement that it would be unfair for God to send a child to hell and to expect man to live up to something they couldn't but wouldn't it be unfair if God made innocent sinless children die when death is meant for sinners? Man this stuff is really confusing!
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Feb 13, 2006 19:39:11 GMT -5
Armen, I think that by the time you enter Bible college you'll be thanking God for the preparation you received from this MB Elizabeth, Theology is definitely confusing. I don't know how many times I've wrestled with all these topics and just felt worn out. I think a lot of the problem is that we have to come to conclusions based on where we think the Bible points. The Bible is not a systematic theology. It seems that often I'm convinced by both sides of a debate. Nevertheless, I think it's good to wrestle through these things in our hearts.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Feb 13, 2006 20:15:08 GMT -5
Armen,
You made a statement to the effect of the sin of adultery is not against the body but the sinner finds it quite natural to commit adultery. The bible contradicts your thought here. Please read 1 Corinthians 6:18 "...he that commits fornication sins against his own body." I am sure you would say sinners find it quite natural to fornicate. God says it is a sin against the body. 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 says Your body is the temple of God and if you defile the temple of God, He will destroy you . How do you defile the temple of God?
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Feb 13, 2006 20:20:10 GMT -5
ejuliot,
Death was brought into the world by sin. Man's body was made mortal. God is correct in saying all have sinned. All have. They all choose to. I never said anyone except Jesus has not. I have said it is possible for everyone to go without sinning.
|
|
|
Post by ejuliot on Feb 13, 2006 20:48:04 GMT -5
Ohhhh, so this all goes back to sinless perfection! Ok, I agree, we can live without sin and man does choose to sin! It is all beginning to make sense! Thanks for your patience!
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Feb 13, 2006 22:06:43 GMT -5
That is why I think this is worth discussing. I have disagreed with the doctrine of original sin for quite some time. However I never made a big deal about it, until multitudes of people would use it for an excuse to say they could not live without sin because they were born sinners. It is sort of like teaching humans they came from animals. They start to act like animals. Teach man he is born a sinner and he is convinced he can never stop sinning.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Feb 14, 2006 0:28:52 GMT -5
Grant - I don't know if man "is born guilty of sin" so much as he is born with the guilt and corruption of sin. He is not guilty of his OWN sin at birth, but Adam's. "...death passed upon all, for that ALL HAVE SINNED" (Rom 5:12). This verse would seem to indicate that Adam's sin and its guilt and condemnation has passed to all and that is why Paul is able to profoundly say, "all have sinned". Armen, correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there at least three types of deaths that the Bible refers to; 1) physical death, 2) spiritual death, 3) eternal death. Man is a part of all creation which all fell victim to physical death from Adam's sin. The world is always in a state of deterioration, our bodies slowly aging (oh how I know this these days!!! LOL). But I was refering to eternal death, Hell. Again, I appreciate this dialogue, it's testing all the nooks and crannies of my understandings. I hope I can be humble enough as we discuss this so I am open to see any errors I might have. I also enourage us all to be checking in with Headquarters constantly as we respond so that we don't swade to arragance and self-righteousness (something I tend to become too easily). Blessings to you all.
|
|
|
Post by bullhornbob on Feb 14, 2006 1:42:23 GMT -5
It is sort of like teaching humans they came from animals. They start to act like animals. Teach man he is born a sinner and he is convinced he can never stop sinning. Amen, Micah. We see the fruit of evolution plaguing our society today, but also the fruit of the error of original sin plaguing our churches as well. It has fostered an evironment of apathy and permissiveness, and it also gives the sinner an excuse to stay in sin. How convenient. I believe the churches are full of false converts, mainly because the doctrine of repentance has been discarded due to man's supposed inabilty to shake free from sin. One note on Romans 5:12 - "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." I find it very interesting how both sides of the debate on OS find footing in this verse. My two cents: Sin entered into the world, not man. Death is the result of sin. All have (and will) choose to sin, which is why Christ came, "to save his people from their sins."
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Feb 14, 2006 8:55:05 GMT -5
I think it is interesting that in Romans 5 "Sin" is personified. It is in the aspect of a person. "Sin hath reigned..." It's almost like "Sin" as a ruler came to reign and "Death" is his coregent. That's one of the only places in scripture that I know of that "Sin" is given personification.
When Adam died, did "Sin" and "Death" begin to reign? That wouldn't make us guilty but we would be under the reign of Sin and Death, which would eventually would give us a propensity to commit "sins" because of the nasty ruler of "Sin."
What do you guys think? I'm just throwing some thoughts out there...
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Feb 14, 2006 16:53:45 GMT -5
Hey brethren and sisters!
Why do babies die? They are not innocent, the bible nowhere says that we are born innocent, but quite the contrary.
Steve - dunno about that brother.
Micah - yes it is a sin against the body that God has given, but that doesn't mean that it goes against our bodies/mind inclination. This possible for everyone to go without sinning before and after conversion makes me wonder if you read the bible. I know you do brother but it just doesn't make sense. Just because some people use the doctrine of original sin as an excuse for their sin, doesn't mean that all do. I do not excuse my sin.
Grant - excellent advice for all to be in a spirit of prayer as we post. Amen!
Parsly - interesting thought.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Feb 14, 2006 18:12:46 GMT -5
Armen,
Death passed upon all men because of Adam's sin, but sin did not pass upon all men because of Adam's sin. As was pointed out above, sin entered the world but not man because of Adam's sin.
Nowhere in the bible does it say we are born innocent? 1 Corinthians 14:20-"...in malice be ye children..." Children are not malicious.
Matthew 18:3-Except ye be converted and become as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Why would God tell us to become like little children to enter the kingdom of heaven? Is it because they are so full of sin? No it is because they are innocent.
Deuteronomy 1:39 and Isaiah 7:16 both say children have no knowledge of good or evil.
Ecclesiastes 7:29 says GOD MADE MAN UPRIGHT but he has sought out many inventions.
How many times do I have to keep posting the same scriptures?
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Feb 14, 2006 18:18:34 GMT -5
Armen,
Another point is the passage of Romans 5:12-21 is to show that as Adam made sin available to everyone (choice), now Jesus made the choice of righteousness available to everyone (by choosing Jesus). The point of the passage is to show that what Jesus (the second Adam) did was much greater than what the first Adam did.
If you say sin passed upon everyone, then you must also say life (eternal life) has passed upon all but it has not. Why? People have to make a choice to choose eternal life just as people have to make a choice to sin.
Adam brought sin into the world and made it available to everyone and Jesus brought life into the world and made it available to everyone.
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Feb 15, 2006 12:50:09 GMT -5
Good afternoon again brethren!
Oh how I praise the Lord! When someone throws a doctrine that confronts what I have always believed, everytime the Lord has shown me clearly the truth. The Romans 7 thing, God showed me clearly that I was wrong and I now believe that Paul is speaking as a converted man speaking of his unsaved days. When it came to election, the Lord showed me the truth and again, this morning as I was reading the scriptures (I use M'Cheyne's reading program) in Job 14:1,4 "Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full of trouble...who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? NOT ONE". Every woman is a sinner and they do not produce unsinful offspring, they are the same as their mothers, sinful and corrupt.
How can you post those scriptures to validate your belief? They are easliy refuted because they are not saying what you think they are saying. Eg Ecc 7:29 God made ADAM (man) upright. It even gives it in the PAST tense for even greater clarity. God MADE not MAKES.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Feb 15, 2006 13:22:55 GMT -5
Great afternoon brothers! (i loved that greeting, Armen, and I had to follow suit)
Armen, Job 14:1,4 only states that a woman will bring offspring that will also be sinful, meaning "bent towards sin" but it doesn't say "guilty of sin" as one is eternally condemned from birth.
Here's something to think about: [2 Sam 12:23] "But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me."
Interesting that David was sure he'd see his son in heaven.
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Feb 15, 2006 13:36:39 GMT -5
Excuse me for stating the obvious.. Jesus was born of a woman.
|
|
|
Post by josh on Feb 15, 2006 14:31:37 GMT -5
Excuse me for stating the obvious.. Jesus was born of a woman. I was thinking the same thing, for the arugment that any child born of a woman is a sinner, then Christ was a sinner. As for the whole, the are we born sinners or not, maybe the question should be: When is sin imputed upon a child. From what I can see the doctrine of a child being a sinner (orignal sin) has some elements lacking to it. While I believe that we are all born with the nature to sin, we are not born with sin imputed upon us already.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Feb 15, 2006 14:52:27 GMT -5
Armen,
Do believe Mary was sinless or something? You are not a catholic are you? Just kidding.
Aside from Jesus, John the Baptist was filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Feb 15, 2006 14:55:06 GMT -5
Josh,
Sin is imputed upon a child when he sins.
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Feb 16, 2006 17:51:15 GMT -5
Ah come on guys! Gimmie some slack here. When the scriptures say that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, you hardly put Christ in there do you? Christ was the exception and always is and he was born of a woman without any man involved, but every other child that is born of woman is born because of the coming together of a sinful man and a sinful woman.
Micah - John the Baptist, now there is a VERY interesting thought. Never thought on it quite like this before. Surely you believe you have to be converted/saved/born again before you can be filled with the Holy Ghost? Mere holiness does not fill with the Spirit. Even being saved does not mean you are FILLED with the Spirit, it has to be sought for as a believer. So John the Baptist is truely a unique character and therefore he MUST be an exception to the rule. He doesn't fit in to ANY creed or set of beliefs that I am aware of. To be filled with the Spirit as an embryo...no one would believe it except that it's written in the word of the living God!! Interesting!
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Feb 16, 2006 21:39:57 GMT -5
Armen,
Perhaps you can help me here, I'm not familiar with any passage that states Jesus was an exception to any "rule" other than He did not sin. But that's not an exception but an alternative in decisions which resulted in not sinning and living according to the Father's will. He said He came and "fulfilled the Law", how could He fulfill it if He was some kind of an exception in a different nature than man? He fulfilled it because He was given the same degrated nature as all man, but He was wise, holy, and perfect in His living according to the Law, according to the nature we were to live, that being in His image.
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Feb 17, 2006 8:39:15 GMT -5
Were you conceived of the Holy Ghost? Does that not make Him different? Unless you know of anyone else who was conceived of the Holy Ghost then I think I am right in saying that Christ is the exception.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Feb 17, 2006 10:31:44 GMT -5
Were you conceived of the Holy Ghost? Does that not make Him different? Unless you know of anyone else who was conceived of the Holy Ghost then I think I am right in saying that Christ is the exception. Armen, I was stating if we simply inherit our sin then Christ would be the exception, but correct me if I'm wrong but you're saying that you believe we inherrit our sin from our fathers only, and nothing at all by our mothers? Please help me see this mentioned in scripture. And if you would, please respond to my previous post regarding David's son... because he was born even through adultery and yet David was confident he'd see him in heaven. And we should remember GOD is not a respecter of persons [ Acts 10:33-35]. Thanks for your patience so I can better understand your views. GOD bless y'all reading these posts. May we come to know Him better as we dig through these truths, and may this not slow us down our labors in reaching the lost.
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Feb 17, 2006 10:58:24 GMT -5
Oh yes, well I believe that there is mercy upon all children till the age of understanding even though they are not pure in themselves.
I believe that the corruption and guilt comes from our fathers. If Eve had eaten the forbidden fruit but Adam refused it when offered and rebuked Eve for eating it, do you think that death and sin would still have entered into the world? I don't. I believe that Adam as the head was responsible and so are all men.
God bless!
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Feb 17, 2006 14:00:58 GMT -5
Oh yes, well I believe that there is mercy upon all children till the age of understanding even though they are not pure in themselves. I believe that the corruption and guilt comes from our fathers. If Eve had eaten the forbidden fruit but Adam refused it when offered and rebuked Eve for eating it, do you think that death and sin would still have entered into the world? I don't. I believe that Adam as the head was responsible and so are all men. God bless! Well actually, Armen, GOD commanded Adam ("the man") not to eat the fruit of the tree: So Adam was the one who was disobedient towards GOD, poor little Eve was just deceived, as are so many women (da'oh! I didn't say that! LOL). Now also note, woman was made from man so she was made in the same nature as him (though, true, this was before he sinned). So unless Scripture is explicitly clear on this, shouldn't we conclude that whatever can be inherrited from man should also be inherrited from woman? And since we know everyone sins, then to say we inherit sin from anyone would mean Jesus would have to... which we know could not have been. Please think about how you perceive sin itself... as I mentioned before, its not a blood-type or disease but a result of disobeying GOD. ... so I guess I should get back to working now... ugh!
|
|
|
Post by tomah on Feb 17, 2006 20:37:07 GMT -5
"So unless Scripture is explicitly clear on this, shouldn't we conclude that whatever can be inherrited from man should also be inherrited from woman?"
No. Like you said bro, it was before the fall so she came from perfection.
"Please think about how you perceive sin itself... as I mentioned before, its not a blood-type or disease but a result of disobeying GOD."
I know but as i was reading AGAIN yesterday in Job 15:14-16
"What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. How much more abominable and filthy is man"
The scriptures proclaim our uncleaness in the sight of God and indicates that we are full of things that are unholy in God's sight. Even full of sin that we're ignorant to.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Feb 18, 2006 0:59:08 GMT -5
Armen, 1) You didn't understand my point I take it, so let me clarify... if woman was made in man's nature, and we can inherit sin from man (like some disease), then being in the same nature as man, we would then inherit sin from woman as well. There is no respecter of persons. When I made note that she was formed before Adam's sin, my intention was to explain that if one inherits sin from the man, then she would have as well. But Adam hadn't sinned at that time yet so she would be considered sinless (as we know she was regardless of this discussion). BUT my continued explanation was meaning to show that if she came from man, then she would also have his same nature, and pass on those same attributes that do get inherited. So if sin is inherited through man, then it would have to be inherited through woman as well. 2) I might be misunderstanding you then... let me try stating what it seems you're saying, then you can correct where I'm misunderstanding you: You believe we inherit our sin from our fathers, not mothers. This constitutes Jesus being pure without sin as a baby, an exception from all mankind. But you've twice quoted Job 15 with the [what I consider 'mis-'] understanding that we are born of a woman and therefore inheritted sin. If Job 15 says what you think it says, then we're inheriting our sin from the woman, not the man. I appreciate the time in responses, and being patient with me as well. God bless you all!
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Mar 6, 2006 12:46:51 GMT -5
If we are born guilty of sin, then are homosexuals "born that way?"
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Mar 6, 2006 16:10:25 GMT -5
Amen, brother. This is another reason why the doctrine of original sin is so damnable. Homosexuals can claim they are born that way, as can other sinners can claim they are born that way.
I experience this on a regular basis with preaching and witnessing to sinners. It is always an excuse to justify sin.
|
|
|
Post by aaron on Apr 21, 2006 8:47:52 GMT -5
I often have overlooked the doctrine of original sin but recently have questioned it and have not found any scripture that proves it. In my opinion, original sin is simply taught by people as fact and others just accept it (because it excuses sin). After searching God showed me Ezekiel 18, which I think refutes the idea of original sin. It says a son will not die for his fathers sin nor a father die for his son sin. It says (Ezk 18:v4 - NKJV) "the soul who sins shall die". Now if original sin does not cause spiritual death then I belive that it should not be called sin. For the wages of sin is death (spiritual). Also, Ezk. 18:2,3 (NKJV) 2 “What do you mean when you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying: ‘ The fathers have eaten sour grapes, And the children’s teeth are set on edge’? 3 “As I live,” says the Lord GOD, “you shall no longer use this proverb in Israel. This proverb sounds very much like the doctrine of original sin. How about: Adam has eaten of the fruit and his offspring's nature have been corrupted. The proverb simply means that people are punished for their fathers crimes. This is so wrong. God refuted it. Ezekiel 18 is an excellent chapter to read for the topics of original sin and backsliding. The following book refuting the idea of original sin is available online to read, it is very interesting: Are Men Born Sinners? - The Myth of Original Sin, Written by A. T. Overstreet found at: www.gospeltruth.net/menbornsinners/mbstitle.htmGod is fair. Original sin is unfair. I'm still open to discussion on the subject but unless someone can show me where God says in the bible "our nature was corrupted because of Adams sin", discussion is kind of pointless (because thats the only thing that will change my mind aboutthe issue).
|
|
|
Post by hopefulheart on Apr 21, 2006 9:52:22 GMT -5
I don't believe in original sin. That's like saying you're guilty before proven innocent. How can you be responsible for something that had nothing to do with you?
Now, saying it hypothetically does exist, while I can understand the exemption that's made for Jesus, I think you're simply being absurd to make the same claim for John the Baptist.
And micah, homosexuals Are born that way. Why would someone choose such an unforgiving (in our culture) orientation?
|
|