Is spiritual death from birth, or is it produced in time?

[Skandelon]

Is the spiritual "death" Paul refers to from birth or is he referring to what mankind will naturally become if left unchecked to himself?

After all James writes: 13 When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

It seems here that "death" is something that comes only after a process of rebellion.

And Paul write in Romans 7 : that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

It just seems to me that Paul's analogy of death is not equal to what Calvinist refer to as "Total Depravity" because its not "from birth" but something that is produced in us or birthed in us over a time of rebellion.

What say you?

 

[annsni]

Ephesians 2:3 is pretty clear to me. We're children of wrath "by nature".

 

[jcjordan]

Is the spiritual "death" Paul refers to from birth or is he referring to what mankind will naturally become if left unchecked to himself?

After all James writes: 13 When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death.

It seems here that "death" is something that comes only after a process of rebellion.

And Paul write in Romans 7 : that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful.

It just seems to me that Paul's analogy of death is not equal to what Calvinist refer to as "Total Depravity" because its not "from birth" but something that is produced in us or birthed in us over a time of rebellion.

What say you?

I say, "have you ever had kids?"

 

[annsni]

I say, "have you ever had kids?"

I keep thinking the same thing. LOL

 

[Winman]

I believe a person has to be mature enough to understand right from wrong before they become accountable.

And look what Paul says in Romans 7.

Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

How could Paul say he was ever "alive"? If he were born a condemned sinner, he would have had the death sentence upon him at birth.
When did Paul not have the law? Only when he was young and did not know or understand the law.

 

[annsni]

So there is sin that God tolerates?

 

[Marcia]

I believe a person has to be mature enough to understand right from wrong before they become accountable.

And look what Paul says in Romans 7.

Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

How could Paul say he was ever "alive"? If he were born a condemned sinner, he would have had the death sentence upon him at birth.
When did Paul not have the law? Only when he was young and did not know or understand the law.

We had a thread on this not long ago - I remember your position and disagreeing strongly with you on it. :smilewinkgrin:

Of course, Paul does not mean that he was without sin before the law came - the law showed him his sin. You have to compare this with other passages.

 

[Winman]

So there is sin that God tolerates?

No, but he does not hold little children accountable.

Deut 1:39 Moreover 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.

Jonah 4:11 And 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?

 

[Skandelon]

I say, "have you ever had kids?"

Actually, yes, I have four kids, and I believe they are born sinners and selfish. Like I've said a thousand times I don't deny the doctrine of Original Sin. Did you all even read the OP?

But, since you ask about children, one thing I've noticed is that they are not born HARDENED to the gospel. In fact, quite the opposite is true. They are able to see, hear and understand the gospel when I teach it to them. They accept it with a child like faith and do not in any way appear to be totally depraved in the sense that Calvinists conclude.

Why didn't either of you respond to the texts which both appear to support my view? Revealing.

 

[Skandelon]

We had a thread on this not long ago - I remember your position and disagreeing strongly with you on it. :smilewinkgrin:

Of course, Paul does not mean that he was without sin before the law came - the law showed him his sin. You have to compare this with other passages.

I don't think anyone is arguing that Paul with "without sin before the law came," but that he did not die until after his sin and continual rebellion as the passages seem to suggest in the OP, you know, the passages you all seem to overlook?

 

[wattie]

We are all born imperfect.. no one perfect from the get go.. but in terms of actual being seperate from God from the beginning or not.. is different. Babies and people who do not have knowledge of right and wrong are under grace from God.. and will go to heaven if they die without that knowledge. It isn't until we get an understanding of salvation and right and wrong till we need to accept Jesus. This can still be very young- I know a pastor's children who were saved at around 4.

Anyway.. point is .. we are born sinful.. but that doesn't mean born condemned.

 

[drfuss]

Those who believe that babies are responsible for original sin before God, agree with the Presbyterians (USA) who believe infant baptism covers the sin problem for infants. This is the reason many churches have infant baptism instead of believer's baptism. The following is from their website:

"God's 'shoeboxes'
This discovery has given me an image to share with parents in the congregation where I am pastor, as we journey together toward the baptism of their children. Baptism is the church's celebration of the fact that God has "shoeboxes" for all of God's adopted children, meaning all of us. In infant baptism we visibly proclaim the central tenet of our Reformed faith: God's grace towards humanity.
When we baptize an infant we testify that God's grace acts on our behalf before we are capable of responding."

Note the last sentence of the quote.

Infant baptism is a part of their reformed faith or Calvinism.

 

[Cypress]

I believe a person has to be mature enough to understand right from wrong before they become accountable.

And look what Paul says in Romans 7.

Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

How could Paul say he was ever "alive"? If he were born a condemned sinner, he would have had the death sentence upon him at birth.
When did Paul not have the law? Only when he was young and did not know or understand the law.

Well said! That is my understanding as well.

 

[annsni]

No, but he does not hold little children accountable.

Deut 1:39 Moreover 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.

Yes - God did not hold these accountable but that's not a measure of salvation is it? God also did not hold those accountable who were under 20 years old but it is certain that those who are near 20 know right from wrong. I do not see how this is a measure of accountability in salvation.

Jonah 4:11 And 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?

And? He also spared them because of the cattle. God cares for even those little ones (and cattle). He wishes to save them - thus they need salvation.

 

[annsni]

Actually, yes, I have four kids, and I believe they are born sinners and selfish. Like I've said a thousand times I don't deny the doctrine of Original Sin. Did you all even read the OP?

But, since you ask about children, one thing I've noticed is that they are not born HARDENED to the gospel. In fact, quite the opposite is true. They are able to see, hear and understand the gospel when I teach it to them. They accept it with a child like faith and do not in any way appear to be totally depraved in the sense that Calvinists conclude.

Why didn't either of you respond to the texts which both appear to support my view? Revealing.

I had 3 children who were just as you say and another one who saw, heard and understood but didn't want it for a while. At 4 years old, she said that she did not want Jesus in her heart - that she was "too young" which showed me that she had thought it out and was rebelling against the Gospel. It was fascinating to watch. She DID eventually give her heart to Christ at a young age and is a very strong believer in Christ now at 17. I totally believe that children are totally depraved and it is GOD who calls them in their time. They are no different than anyone else.

 

[annsni]

We are all born imperfect.. no one perfect from the get go.. but in terms of actual being seperate from God from the beginning or not.. is different. Babies and people who do not have knowledge of right and wrong are under grace from God.. and will go to heaven if they die without that knowledge. It isn't until we get an understanding of salvation and right and wrong till we need to accept Jesus. This can still be very young- I know a pastor's children who were saved at around 4.

Anyway.. point is .. we are born sinful.. but that doesn't mean born condemned.

So there is then sinners in heaven who have not bee washed by the blood of the Lamb? I don't see that in Scripture. I know it's a "comfort" to us to think this but since God is just, why is He overlooking sin?

 

[annsni]

Those who believe that babies are responsible for original sin before God, agree with the Presbyterians (USA) who believe infant baptism covers the sin problem for infants.

Only if one believes that baptism saves. But most Calvinists do not. Thus infant baptism is wrong.

 

[asterisktom]

Only if one believes that baptism saves. But most Calvinists do not. Thus infant baptism is wrong.

It certainly is. One of the writings that opened my eyes on Matthew Henry, though I greatly admire much of what he wrote, was this piece from his Treatise on Baptism, emphasis mine:


"As far as the parents are concerned, we are sure, that the children
are not so regenerated, as not to need good instructions, when they
become capable of them, and yet are so regenerated, that if they die
in infancy, parents may take comfort from their baptism in reference
to their salvation: and as to the children, when they grow up, we are
sure, that their baptismal regeneration, without something more, is
not sufficient to bring them to heaven: and yet it may be urged, (as I
said before,) in praying to god to give them grace, and in persuading
them to submit to it."

 

[annsni]

It certainly is. One of the writings that opened my eyes on Matthew Henry, though I greatly admire much of what he wrote, was this piece from his Treatise on Baptism, emphasis mine:


"As far as the parents are concerned, we are sure, that the children
are not so regenerated, as not to need good instructions, when they
become capable of them, and yet are so regenerated, that if they die
in infancy, parents may take comfort from their baptism in reference
to their salvation: and as to the children, when they grow up, we are
sure, that their baptismal regeneration, without something more, is
not sufficient to bring them to heaven: and yet it may be urged, (as I
said before,) in praying to god to give them grace, and in persuading
them to submit to it."

Yep - he was wrong on that count.

 

[drfuss]

Only if one believes that baptism saves. But most Calvinists do not. Thus infant baptism is wrong.

Most Presbyterians believe bpatism saves only until we are old enough to accept Christ for ourselves. After that, baptism does not count as a part of salvation.

My point was that the Presbyterians have something to cover infants since they, like some on here, believe infants are accountable to God for being born in sin.