|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Nov 24, 2007 12:39:56 GMT -5
Dirk,
Yes we all need a savior because we have chosen to be criminals, not because we were born cripples.
But I would argue that Satan would be happier if the Church never came to sound doctrine. Satan always invents false doctrines, especially to destroy holiness. And original sin is one of Satan's favorite doctrines, sinners use it on campus all the time to excuse why they don't turn from their sin. They argue that they can't stop sinning because they were born that way (like homosexuals argue). But Romans 1 says homosexuals sin against nature, not because they have a homosexual nature!
But the bible says that we must hold on to the sound doctrine which is according to godliness.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Nov 24, 2007 12:45:48 GMT -5
This is an old post I thought I'd repost.
-------------------------------------
All sinners choose to have a sinful nature, they develop their nature by their own voluntary choices. Choices develop the law of habit, which is synonymous with a sinful nature.
But the bible even says that "men have corrupted themselves". Sinners are criminals, not cripples. They are sinners by choice, not by birth. Sin is a choice, not a birth defect.
As John Fletcher said, we all need Jesus because of our "voluntary" and "avoidable" transgressions. Every man will give an account on judgment day for his own sins! And it's our own sins that we need a Savior for!
Each man is responsible for “the things done in his body”, and is judged “according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad”. (2Cor 5:10) In punishment or reward, it is all according to their own works. (2Cor 11:15, Rev 22:12)
We inherit death because of Adam. Death is passed upon all men because of Adam.
Only what is physical, our fleshly bodies, is hereditary. (Gen 1:21, 1Cor 15:38-39, Heb 2:14) While we inherit our physical bodies from our parents, which are now subjected to death and disease because of Adams sin (1Corinthians 15:21-22), we do not inherit our parents guilt. (2Kings 14:6, Deu 24:16, 2Chr 25:4, Eze 18:2-4, Eze 18:19-20) Our soul, or our spiritual condition, comes from God, since the soul is not hereditary.
2 Kings 14:6: But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
Deuteronomy 24:16: The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
2 Chronicles 25:4: But he slew not their children, but did as it is written in the law in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.
Ezekiel 18:2-4: What 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? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. Behold, 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.
Ezekiel 18:19-20: 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. The 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.
There is no way conceivable in the English language for the bible to say any clearer that children do not bear the iniquity of their fathers, sin is not hereditary propagated by generation.
It is our own voluntary, avoidable sins that brought us into captivity, from which we need deliverance.
Ro 6:16 - Don't you know that when you give yourselves to obey someone you become that person's slave? You can be slaves of sin. Then you will die. Or you can be slaves who obey God. Then you will live a godly life.
Everyone sins once they reach the age of accountability. Most likely because of the law of habit, because the habit of serving your emotions is developed, because emotions develope long before the conscience or reason does.
So when it says, "all have sinned" Romans 3:23, this is only speaking of those who are capable of sinning. But only he that has knowledge of good and evil.
Jas 4:17 - Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin.
That is why babies haven't sinned. Because babies do not know any better.
Romans 9:11 - For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil
Isa 7:16 - before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good
The bible refers to babies as "innocent": De 19:10, De 19:13, De 21:8, De 21:9, 1Sa 19:5, 1Ki 2:31, 2Ki 21:16, 2Ki 24:4, Ps 94:21, Ps 106:38, Pr 1:11, Pr 6:17, Isa 59:7, Jer 7:6, Jer 22:3, Jer 22:17, Jer 26:15, Joe 3:19, Jon 1:14
I think it is very important that we get this right.
I believe we inherit physical depravity from our parents. But moral depravity is our own doing. As the bible says, a child is not punished for the sins of the parent, neither has a child in the womb sinned against God. But all men need Jesus Christ because of their own voluntary, avoidable sin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Passages like used to defend original sin:
Ps 51:5 - Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
This passage says nothing about Adam, Eve, the fall, or the whole human race.
Who is the object and who is the subject in this passage? David is the object, his Mother is the subject. This passage says that it was Davids mother who birthed David in sin. It was the sin of the Mother. Possibly why David was not shown by his father before Samuel at first. He was possibly an embarressment to the family, for being an illegitament child.
If I told someone, "My Mother had me in sin" they would know what I meant. My mother was not married.
I was born in Connecticut, but Connecticut was born in me.
Psalms 58:3 "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies."
When do babies learn to speak? Immediately after being born, or shortly after being born?
This passage does not say babies sinned in or before the womb. But it says they sin after the womb.
But you cannot take this passage completely literally. It's a psalm and it's poetic. Babies do not learn to talk immediately after being born, but learn to speak shortly after being born. This passage seems to obviously be saying that it isn't long after birth, maybe a couple years, before children start to sin themselves.
Another scripture people try to use to prove "original sin" is from the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy:
"visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children to the third and forth generation".
But, if this scripture was talking about original sin, original sin stops after three or four generations! So only Adams great great grand children would have inherited Adams sinful stuff.
But the doctrine of original sin says that the entire human race, from Adam to everybody, inherit some sinful stuff.
This scripture does not say that what is inherited is continually passed on, but that what is inherited stops after 3-4 generations.
I believe this passage is talking about physical depravity. A drug baby for example inherits physical cravings for drugs, but, maybe genetically, this physical depravity only lasts for 3-4 generations and then corrects itself or fades away.
Romans 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.
This passage can be interpreted as to mean automatically and unconditionally. For is all men are condemned because of Adam, the laws of interpretion would require that all men are justified because of Christ, for the language is the same which is used for both of them.
But rather, both hell is dependent upon our own actions, and justification in Christ is dependent upon our own choices. Neither condemnation, nor justification is automatic or unconditional for anyone.
Adam started a rebellion in the Universe. And those who join him in that rebellion will share in his condemnation. Jesus Christ was crucified for the sins of all mankind, making justification available to all. And those who repent and believe, who are crucified with Christ, will be justified.
1Co 15:22 - For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
The context of this passage is the resurrection. Because of the sin of Adam, all inherit a physically dying body. And now because of Christ, all will be resurrected. That is what the context says. This passage is not talking about moral depravity, but physical depravity.
Paul said in Romans 7:20, 7:17 that "sin dwelleth in me". But he clarified his statement a few verses down by saying, "the law of sin that is in my members" (Rom 7:23-25). Paul was talking about "body of death" (Rom 7:24-25)
Paul was speaking of the physical depravity that was dwelling in him. We inherit, like a drug baby does, physical feelings and emotions which crave gratification, which craving can be gratified by sin.
So we inherit a physical proneness, or a physical bias towards sin. But involuntary physical emotions and feelings are temptation to sin. The "lust of the flesh" is temptation, while obeying the lust of the flesh is a sin.
That is the distinction that James made:
James 1:14: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
So we must distinguish between the physical and the moral, between the constitutional and the ethical.
Physical lust, according to James, is "temptation" which brings forth "sin" when it is yielded to.
So there is no doubt we inherit a physical proneness and bias towards sin because of our parents. Medical science even proves this with drug babies. But we are only accountable for our own sins, for our own choices. And if we voluntarily yeild to the lust of the flesh, THEN we are guilty of sin.
|
|
|
Post by Brother. Ross on Nov 24, 2007 12:50:48 GMT -5
tbxi: If sin was not a choice and we were born with sin, (or created with sinfulness) God would not be justified in sending someone to hell, He would be unjust in that we are punished for something we have no control of, rather than for our choices. Proverbs 3:31 Envy thou not the oppressor, and CHOOSE none of his ways. Proverbs 1:28,29 Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me: For that they hated knowledge, and did not CHOOSE the fear of the LORD: You will either choose to sin or not to. Now of course his eight month old, will sin because God says all will in Romans 3:23, so we only know that because God told us. Do we know if she will repent or not? God does, but she still has to choose to repent. (Kerrigan I'm sure she will ) So foreknowledge doesn't mean causation, think about this: God causing someone to sin, then that person repenting for what God caused them to do, or even God causing someone to repent of something he originally caused them to do. makes no sense either way to me.
|
|
|
Post by tbxi on Nov 24, 2007 13:24:00 GMT -5
By the way, don't bother to state all of the nonsense MGT theories about love having to be free-will-grounded to be real, or the foundation of moral accountability... because as many times as you have tried to prove them, you have failed, and they have been shown to be unscriptural (in that they lack any kind of scriptural proof). This is a typical tyler comment. "you have failed...shown to be unscriptural...nonsense...blah...blah" Brother, you haven't proven anything concerning Calvinism EVER on this message board, yet you think you have! Maybe you can show us again, o wise one, how smart you are and how stupid we all are. Come, little children, let us sit at the teacher's feet that we may learn from him, because he knows all and we know nothing! I never said that I was smart, that you were stupid, or that you know nothing. How else would you like me to express my sentiment that so many of the "moral government" assertions are totally unfounded? The "love isn't genuine if it's caused" or "God would be evil if He caused sin to occur", or the longer example from Ross's post above: "If sin was not a choice and we were born with sin, (or created with sinfulness) God would not be justified in sending someone to hell, He would be unjust in that we are punished for something we have no control of, rather than for our choices." These are unbiblical ideas, and yet they form the foundation of much of your thinking. This is all I was saying. Yes, God would be and is justified in that situation, because He's God, and whatever God does is just. For someone who believes in exhaustive foreknowledge, there is no way to avoid the fact that God could have simply not created the people who He knew would go to hell anyway, and thus, the fact that He created them knowing what would happen to them is, in itself, causation of that event. It is very easy to say "you haven't proven anything concerning Calvinism". I could just as easily say that you haven't proven anything either, but that would get me nowhere. Concerning your "read above" reply, I did read your responses to Alan and saw none on the first page that were adequate. Someone will probably object "Yes they were adequate!" or something like that, but whatever. Anyway, they still don't answer the problem. But I am not going to reiterate my objection anymore in this thread. It is clear enough on the first page. I am going to step out of this now.
|
|
|
Post by bondslavenchrist on Nov 24, 2007 15:39:07 GMT -5
NOTICE>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Jesus said we are NOT condemned for our sins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Joh 3:16 For God so greatly loved and dearly prized the world that He [even] gave up His only begotten (unique) Son, so that whoever believes in (trusts in, clings to, relies on) Him shall not perish (come to destruction, be lost) but have eternal (everlasting) life. Joh 3:17 For God did not send the Son into the world in order to judge (to reject, to condemn, to pass sentence on) the world, but that the world might find salvation and be made safe and sound through Him. Joh 3:18 He who believes in Him [who clings to, trusts in, relies on Him] is not judged [he who trusts in Him never comes up for judgment; for him there is no rejection, no condemnation--he incurs no damnation]; but he who does not believe (cleave to, rely on, trust in Him) is judged already [he has already been convicted and has already received his sentence] because he has not believed in and trusted in the name of the only begotten Son of God. [He is condemned for refusing to let his trust rest in Christ's name.] Joh 3:19 The [basis of the] judgment (indictment, the test by which men are judged, the ground for the sentence) lies in this: the Light has come into the world, and people have loved the darkness rather than and more than the Light, for their works (deeds) were evil. [Isa. 5:20.]
We are either NOT condemned OR CONDEMNED for what we do with Jesus Christ!
That is what Jesus says! Jesus came to give us a choice. So the idea about God sending us to hell for something we have no control over is FALSE! We have a choice what we do about Jesus and it if for this choice that we either enter the Kingdom or not.
AND as for the fact of people using the idea of "original Sin" as an excuse for continued sin, Paul writes in Rom that it is NO excuse at all AND ALSO in Col 2:11 he tells us that Jesus Himself removed the corrupt carnal nature with its passions and desires and then gives us Hi nature.
If the carnal nature is removed, then it is NOT THERE ANY LONGER!
All of these "arguments" against original sin are experiential and not based in absolute scriptural truth. There is NO PLACE in scripture that says we do or DO NOT have original sin except in the mind of those who want the scripture to infer it.
But NO ONE can post a verse that says this one way or the other. The ONLY thing that has been shown are the IDEAS OF MEN! We don't need man's ideas.
We have had MORE THAN ENOUGH OF man's ideas and opinions. What we need today more than anything else is GOD's ideas and God's ways and GOD's opinions.
So no amount of quoting from Finney, Pelageus, or anyone else means anything. All that is there is circumstantial evidence and NO TRUE VERDICT can be made from circumstantial evidence.
In the mind of one person the scriptures say one thing. In the mind of another the scriptures say another. HOWEVER, the necessity is we ALL NEED JESUS and JESUS ALONE!
The whole point is Jesus and NO AMOUNT of arguing about original sin and such will change that.
You can continue to attempt to prove your point over and over but it will change nothing. All it will do is cause dissention. Timothy has much to say on this subject about foolish arguments and that is what this is.
Nuff said!
a bondslave in Christ Jesus, Dirk
|
|