|
Post by evanschaible on Apr 17, 2006 10:40:35 GMT -5
To start off this thread that I am sure will be a good one, I want to qoute an article I found in the eSword extras that is a defense of Christians Perfection, Here is the link if you are interested in the whole book, www.e-sword.net/step.html , It is primarily a defense of Christian Perfection and it is titled Wesleyan Collection #4. But here is the qoute to start us off, Now I agree with this. Rom 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Rom 6:18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. Any thoughts, refutations, additions, is this possible, and please let us keep it civil. And the discussion is not that of Perfection again, but whether or not Original Sin can be eradicated.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Noel on Apr 17, 2006 20:44:38 GMT -5
Evan, This is a good topic that I think would help to clarify the Wesleyan - Arminian belief in Christian Perfection. The Wesleyan - Arminian belief is that when someone is born again they experience initial sanctification. At this point the Christian has two natures the new man and the old man. They also believe that there is a second work of grace called entire sanctification where the Holy Spirit eradicates the old nature. I don't agree with this at this time, but I'm still working through it and don't fell like I have a good enough grasp of the issues involved to outright reject it. A good website for understanding the Wesleyan viewpoint is: www.fwponline.cc/arminiandex.html
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on Apr 19, 2006 13:11:57 GMT -5
If Jesus came to destroy the work of the devil, and the body of sin, wouldnt that include the old sinful nature?
The new creature in Christ is entirely new right? Tha means thay the new creature is no longer sinful by nature. At least that is my take on it.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on Apr 23, 2006 15:16:51 GMT -5
No such thing as original sin...not one doctrinal exegetical study (meaning a PATTERN; not three or four verses) show any such doctrine.
We are born with a sin nature, a nature inclined to evil...but original sin as taught today?
I don't see it in Scripture.
I'm born with the results of Adam's sin, yet the Lord doesn't hold us accountable for what Adam did..we only reap the RESULTS of what he did.
Hence, a sin nature.
Am I even explaining that understandably?
haha
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 9, 2006 13:06:39 GMT -5
Brother,
Read the quote in my initial post. It explains what I meant by original sin, the propensity to sin, not the guilt.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 9, 2006 14:00:55 GMT -5
ahhh..... now I see.... I'm wondering, though.....
If the new man, created in Christ, is perfect, whcih i believe it is, doe sthat negate the old nature simply by it's PRESENCE? I woul dhave a difficult time with such a view.
Could you explain more? I'm only partially understanding your view, Evan... though it's one I want to learn more about
|
|
|
Post by aaron on May 10, 2006 1:51:13 GMT -5
Can someone prove with scripture that we are born with a sinful nature (inclination to do evil)? Original sin is false in the sense of impartation of guilt. I also doubt that we are born with an inclination to sin, a tainted nature. I find it extremely difficult to accept that we are born with a biase toward sin. Please can you show this to me in scripture?
After we know right from wrong and choose to sin, then we have a sinful nature. Our nature does not dictate the way we act, the way we act dictaits what nature we have. I have heard a saying, we create our habits then our habits create us. To say someone has a sinful nature before they have sinned makes no sense. If I was to say someone had a gentle nature, they would first have to be gentle for this statement to be true. To say someone has a gentle nature before they even act in a gentle manner is just an assumption.
A dictionary* definition of the word "nature" (www.dictionary.com):
7.The essential characteristics and qualities of a person or thing 8.The fundamental character or disposition of a person; temperament
the other relevant definition could be,
5.Theology. Humankind's natural state as distinguished from the state of grace.
but this definition dosen't really define what one's nature consists of.
So from my understanding our actions dictate and influence our nature, not the other way around. So the nature of a baby is not sinful, nor are they born with a bias to sin because they have not yet sinned. Any thoughts?
People may ask well why does everyone end up sinning then? Answer: The word is full of temptation, if Adam and Eve sinned in a perfect world with no sinful material or sinful people around to tempt them (Satan only tempted them with the tree) How much easier is it for children to sin when they come to a knowledge of right and wrong. 'Woe to the world because of its temptations' - Christ. Not only are children surrounded by sinful people (bad examples, in conduct and speech) and sinful material(T.V., music, pictures, violent games and cartoons ect.) they are also only young in their comprehension and are immature. Where as we have Adam an Eve who where fully grown in the perception and reasoning (that is an assumption) who where tempted only once and fell. Adam and Eve did not have a sinful nature but sinned, so did Lucifer and the fallen angels. This proves that you do not need a sinful nature to sin.
I think we create our own sinful nature by sinning. This becomes re-enforced as our sin is repeated and we are indeed slaves to sin. 'Whoever commits sin is a slave to sin'.
Just an alternative veiw on the subject (I think Finney taught something close to this),
Aaron.
*The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 10, 2006 8:18:21 GMT -5
So araon, then you by default belivee that out of all the individuals ever born to the human race, it is at least possible that one out of the masses could choose to never ever sin? The Book or Romans make sthe issue clear:
Romans 5:12-19
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:
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 10, 2006 14:15:27 GMT -5
This, I admit, is a controversial topic of study. But I ask that we can all reason together unbiased to simply accept the truth for the truth’s sake. I have systematized this so that we can cover all bases in a short amount of space. I have started at the gate and ran to the finish. Before you refute, agree, or call me a heretic, read the entire post.
“Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin” (Rom. 6:6).
I have pulled this verse from its context, but contextually it means exactly what it says. Paul addresses baptism, and then the meaning viz. That we are dead to sin.
But the topic here is much illuminated by this revealing verse. Notice, “…that the body of sin might be destroyed…” Now I have had the objection that this simply means the body, as in the whole, like a body of water. But somehow I think it means more than that.
In the context of our “old man” the body would most definitely mean our physical body. But Paul goes a step further and says, “the body of sin.” To fully understand this we must look ahead to Romans chapter seven.
“For I know that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing.” In verses 24, 25 Paul says, “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.” Here Paul calls it the “body of death” and since “the wages of sin is death” we can properly equate the “body of sin” with the “body of death”.
So here we have established that the body talked about herein is indeed the physical body. Notice also here again, Paul says that Jesus can deliver us from the body of death.
So now, we are lead again into the differentiation between the once born and twice born. The once born are naturally inclined to sin. The twice born however are not. Why?
“For he that is dead is freed from sin” (Rom. 6:7). Again here this is not the carnal understanding of death, but the spiritual. We can be physically dead in a spiritual sense. And if we be dead with Christ, we shall also live with him. But how shall we live?
“he that is born of God [the twice born] doth not commit sin; for His seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin because he is born of God” (I John 3:9).
Now the objection that will arise here is that this is not possible. But we must remember, it is not if it is true for us, rather if its true, and it is.
The original Greek reads this way, “he is not able to sin”. If the sin nature, or the flesh, still was alive in us, we would definitely be able to sin. But here John says we are not able to sin. Again, don't think this isn't true because we haven't reached this point, but search the truth to see what heights we can reach.
Jesus came to destroy the works of the devil, is not sin the work of the devil? If Jesus destroys sin in us that includes all sin, not some. We can, through Christ, be brought into the perfect relationship with God that Adam enjoyed before the fall.
“Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.” (I Peter 1:22-25)
“We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not” (I John 5:18).
Now, to finally drive this point home, I would like to examine a few points of new creation or new birth. When we are born we are not guilty of sin, just inclined that way. But when we are born again we are no longer the creature formed in the first Adam’s likeness, but rather in the last Adam’s.
“Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” (II Cor. 5:17). The old creature, or the natural man, is knit together in the womb in sin, born inclined to sin, and at the first inkling will gladly yield their bodies to engage in the filth of sin. But the new creature is totally new, ALL things have passes away and ALL things have become new.
If all things are new, does that not mean the nature as well?
“Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust” (II Peter 1:4).
Thoughts, comments, refutes?
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 11, 2006 13:36:06 GMT -5
I agree, this means the new nature... however, is there not something which tempts us to sin? Yes, it may be from the outside.... Yet, if we are not ABLE to sin, how it is that Peter was rebuked for his sin by Paul? How is it that Jesus commands repentance from sin to ALL Revelation Churches but one? You see? To not be ABLE to sin would be to negate the salvation of those in Scripture who clearly were called to repent because they in fact DID sin. I'm not saying, "Let's all sin". I'm simply pointing to it's potential. To NOT be able to sin would mean you CANNOT sin. I don't see that in Scripture, brother
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 11, 2006 17:27:48 GMT -5
It is still raining . But, we must not take the ability to not sin out of its context. I John 3:6, "Whosoever abideth in Him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth has not seen Him, neither known Him." This verse is the crux of perfection. "Whosoever abides in Him..." I ask how one can sin that is abiding every moment in the saviour? John puts amazng emphasis upon this doctrine, I think he mentions abiding in the saviour in everything he wrote. We will have temptation yes, but we do not have to give in, God is with the redeemed and crucified and will open a door for us to not sin (I Cor. 10:13). Jesus said "apart from me ye can do nothing..." but with Jesus we can do all things, inlcuding not sin. That is my twopence, I really dont understand this fully, I just work my way through things here because many raise great questions and it drives me into the word.
|
|
|
Post by rsmportland on May 11, 2006 17:33:20 GMT -5
I don't believe original sin, as yet I have to fully study the subject, but wouldn't all babies go to hell if OS existed?
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 11, 2006 17:39:51 GMT -5
Again, read my initial post. Original sin is not the guilt of sin, but the propensity to sin.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 12, 2006 7:44:38 GMT -5
Yes, the propensity... agreed fully! That's the Word!
|
|
|
Post by aaron on May 12, 2006 8:09:17 GMT -5
So araon, then you by default belivee that out of all the individuals ever born to the human race, it is at least possible that one out of the masses could choose to never ever sin? The Book or Romans make sthe issue clear: Romans 5:12-19 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: (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification. For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Yes, Bible thumper I have read this. I believe it is a hard passage to grasp. Make note that it does not say that mens natures have been corrupted because of Adam. So it is not a direct scripture proving 'original sin'. If you approach the scripture with the belief of original sin then yes it may seem this way but we shouldn't make assumptions. We should read the word from a neutral perspective rather than approaching with preconceived ideas. If anything this talks about men dieing because of Adam or dieing spiritually just like Adam. Yes I do believe it would be possible if a baby was born full of the Holy Spirit , for it to live a sinless life and be saved. You may say this cannot be - but Christ did it! The possibility is there for other children but the weight of temptation is to great. Please look at the following link which disproves the idea of original sin (very intersting): www.gospeltruth.net/menbornsinners/mbsindex.htmIn reply to the verses you quoted Bible Thumper read this (It is better than anything I could write): www.gospeltruth.net/menbornsinners/mbs02.htm(Go to the bottom of the page to find comments on Romans 5) In Christ, Aaron
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 12, 2006 9:01:33 GMT -5
That is exactly what I belive.... we have the propensity to sin, in the words of Brother Evan.
I also do not believe we were born in "Original sin", but in death, or with the RESULT of Adam's sin (not the guilt).
As for a child dying as an adult without choosing to sin, and comparing that possiblity to "Christ did it" is error, brother.
There is not even a POSSIBILITY of anyone "not" sinning.
That's why our Jesus came.
He came, not to "prove" we could never ever sin if we chose not to, but He came BECAUSE we're all born in death.
Hence, the need for Salvation.
We are free from the power of sin once we come to the Cross; not before that.
There is NONE that seek after God.
NO ONE ever anywhere could ever at any time live and die without sinning.
That would mean Jesus Christ is Saviour to all those who have sinned....excluding those who "died without sin".
Not possible.
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 12, 2006 10:47:33 GMT -5
Aaron,
I have honestly never heard your viewpoint before. It is still raining so let me see of I can show you your error.
At first I thought brother Dan was refuting my post about our ability as the redeemed to "go and sin no more", but then I read your post fully.
Jesus was God, is God, and always will be God, therefore we cannot use his perfectly sinless life on earth as an example of a feeble creature being able to do the same. He is the creator, we are the creature.
Now I understand your bias, but like so many others, I fear you dont want to believe it because it casts a light upon other things. Like you mentioned babies going to hell.
When the first adam sinned, creation fell. When the last adam lived righteous, man can now come back the the place adam was. If we are in Jesus, walk in newness of life (the likeness of His ressurection), and abide in Jesus then we can live with God just like the first adam.
"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:" (Rom. 5:12)
I want you to seriously think about this verse. Why are babies born dying? Why is the minute the babie is concieved the clock starts ticking? Death passed upon ALL because sin entered into the world. Notice in this verse it really says nothing of being guilty. The souls that sins it shall die, and babies die do they not?
"Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come." (Rom. 5:14)
Again death is the punishment of sin. Babies have yet to reach the age of knowing right from wrong, good from bad. Martin Luther stated that babies should be baptized because they are capable of having faith, this is utterly rediculous! Babies do not even know where they are or who their parents are, how can they sin, or have faith?
Death is the proof of adams sin, that is why the twice born (redeemed) never die. Jesus bore our sin on that cross. Our frail human bodies die, but the soul never dies.
Rom 5:15 But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many. Rom 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offenses unto justification. Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offense death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.) Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Rom 5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 12, 2006 11:01:37 GMT -5
Yes sir, Evan! Well presented!
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 12, 2006 11:06:45 GMT -5
Well not really,
I think I need to clear one thing up before Aaron reads it.
By a baby dying I mean physically dying. But a baby cannot spiritually die (the second death/hell) because they cant sin. Sin is not imputed where there is no law. The baby cannot concieve of disodeiance or obediance, therefore it cannot be held accontable.
|
|
|
Post by aaron on May 12, 2006 20:15:14 GMT -5
Thank you guys. No one has really explained it to me before that way. Rather I have just been taught to accept the sinful nature and believe by faith that we inherit it (which I can't do - not blindly). I won't accept anything unless the bible backs it up. I do see where your coming from and using Christ was a bad example - though He was the only example of a person never sinning. I know you take the viewpoint that we physically die because of Adam but we spiritually die because of our own transgression. Evan, you said: And Bible thumper you said: I agree that death is a result of Adams sin but not because of an imputation of a sinful nature. Ever thought that God cursed man kind when He said, "From dust you came and to dust you will return" (Something along those lines in Genesis). God said to Adam "the day you eat of this fruit you will die". They didn't die physically that day but they died spiritually. Physical death came because God said they would return to dust. There were a few things God cursed in Genesis like painful childbearing for women, laboring for food etc. So yes death is proof of Adams sin, also the other curses prove Adam and Eves sin. But I don't think death itself is a proof of an inherited sinful nature. Bible thumper: Got a question then, was it inevitable that Adam & Eve would sin? Good discussion guys.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 13, 2006 9:45:28 GMT -5
Not inevitable, but it did take place, brother, so I cannot go on the "what if's" but only on the "what took place" line of thought. For the sake of the question, however, let's say: What IF Adam and Eve never sinned? Their righteousness and sanctification would have still come through the Lamb of God, as He was a Lamb slain BEFORE the foundation of the world
|
|
|
Post by Jules on May 13, 2006 13:55:41 GMT -5
Well not really, I think I need to clear one thing up before Aaron reads it. By a baby dying I mean physically dying. But a baby cannot spiritually die (the second death/hell) because they cant sin. Sin is not imputed where there is no law. The baby cannot concieve of disodeiance or obediance, therefore it cannot be held accontable. ok, Paul said when the law came, sin came to life. So it was dead in him before the law, and sin was certainly in the world before the law was given, as Romans teaches us. So if we say that babies who die all automatically go ot heaven because they have not sinned in the flesh, then we are born perfect then - all of us. And if we are born perfect,then there is no need for Christ. A sinful nature IS sin. Babies (if they go to heaven) go to heaven the same way adults do - by the grace of God. We can't make exceptions, even if it makes us "feel" better about those "innocent" babies. They are not innocent. They are born in iniquity.
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 13, 2006 15:48:51 GMT -5
What are you saying Jules?
Do babies go to hell?
Let us be realistic. How can a baby be guilty? We suffer the consequences of Adam's sin, not the guilt.
|
|
|
Post by biblethumper on May 13, 2006 16:39:14 GMT -5
The man who declares with stern authority that a baby goes to hell has most likely not come to the Kingdom as a child.
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 13, 2006 16:44:36 GMT -5
I like that, that is a good quote.
|
|
|
Post by aaron on May 13, 2006 22:56:01 GMT -5
I would agree with that quote. Didn't Christ say to be like little children for such is the kingdom of Heaven. No man will go to hell for another's sin. Read Ezk. 18. God hates that thought. We are accountable to God for our own actions alone. I do agree with Jules that it is either one or the other, the child's born without sin or not. I believe a child is morally neutral - neither knowing right from wrong thus, innocent. Here are two verses quoted from another discussion: Deuteronomy 1:39 KJV39Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it. Isaiah 7:14-16 KJV14Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 15Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. 16For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings. Also, Jonah 4:9-11 9And God said to Jonah, Doest thou well to be angry for the gourd? And he said, I do well to be angry, even unto death. 10Then said the LORD, Thou hast had pity on the gourd, for the which thou hast not laboured, neither madest it grow; which came up in a night, and perished in a night: 11And should not I spare Nineveh, that great city, wherein are more than sixscore thousand persons that cannot discern between their right hand and their left hand; and also much cattle? Children are no doubt innocent. They are innocent of actual transgression because they have not transgressed. It blasphemes God's character to say that he would send children to hell because of Adam. Muslims look upon this topic of original sin and see this great fallacy, other men being condemned for one mans sin. It is actually something that stops them from coming to Christ. I agree with what Evan said, "We suffer the consequences of Adam's sin, not the guilt." Note that the consequences are the curses. God never cursed mankind's nature. We are going die physically because of Adam, not spiritually though. Adams sin has nothing to do with us rebelling against God. I don't see how we can be corrupted because of Adam so that we will sin at least once. If this is so why didn't Christ sin? He had a human mother who had sinned before. I guess you could say he had no corupt nature because he is the Son of God, but Adam also was a son of God and he sinned. There is no need of a corupt nature to sin. I guess you could say well Christ was God. Well that would have got me. Do you think Christ was physically able to sin here on earth? I mean He was tempted but could He sin? (Temptation is not temptation if you can only choose to do right). If Christ was not born with the ability to sin than he had not taken on human flesh. And we know anyone who denies Christ came in the flesh is of the Antichrist. If Christ was not born with an inclination to sin like everyone else how can he be classed as human? If Christ was not tempted as we are (the bible says he was) then either: 1. The bible is false or 2. We are born totally capable of obeying God (being born with no corrupted nature). Christ was human just like you and I, was capable of sinning like you and I, was tempted like you and I but He did not sin. How can he be tempted like us if he did not have this corrupted nature? I think our temptation would be a lot worse than His if this was the case. How can he sympathize with our temptation if he has never been tempted as we are with a corrupted nature(Hebrews says he does sympathize with us when we are tempted because He has suffered the same temptation - yet without sin). Please explain to me what you guys believe about Christ and sin. Was He capable of sin? Romans 6:23 NKJVThe wages of sin is death but the gift of God is eternal life through Christ Jesus our Lord. People seem to assume we must have some sort of sin before we physically die (thus original sin/corrupted nature in babies). This is not so. The verse above talks about spiritual (eternal) death not physical death. Here eternal death is being contrasted with eternal life. The reason people die is because we can't eat of the tree of life and God said man would return to dust. Christ died even though he had no sin. He did not die eternally (by going to hell, being kept there eternally) because He had not sinned, the Holy Spirit raised Him up. Note that He did die physically. Ezk. 181The word of the LORD came unto me again, saying, 2What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? 3As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. 4Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die. 5But if a man be just, and do that which is lawful and right, .....(to the punch line)........ 9Hath walked in my statutes, and hath kept my judgments, to deal truly; he is just, he shall surely live, saith the Lord GOD. You still seem to say this just as the Israelites:19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. 20The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. 29Yet saith the house of Israel, The way of the LORD is not equal. O house of Israel, are not my ways equal? are not your ways unequal? Seeking God's truth, Aaron
|
|
|
Post by evanschaible on May 14, 2006 8:45:20 GMT -5
Let us get back on topic shall we.
|
|
|
Post by aaron on May 14, 2006 16:06:53 GMT -5
I thought what we were discussing did address the opening statement.
|
|