• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

"all have sinned"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cypress

New Member
Part of the challenge here is that you (and others) miss one simple point: We are not directly created in God's image. Now, before people call me names and accuse me of stuff...I whole-heartedly affirm that we, even today, do bear the image of God.

However, we are not created in the image of God as Adam was. We are pro-created in the image of Adam (see Genesis 5).

So, while we bear the image of God (hence Genesis 9 demanding the death penalty for those who commit murder), we are primarily in the image of Adam (hence Paul's very common usage of "in Adam").

This is the concept in Biblical and Systematic Theology of Federal Headship. Now, there are those that want to dismiss the Federal Headship of Adam saying it is unfair that we are held guilty for Adam's sin. However, if you don't affirm that, given Paul's arguing, you cannot have us being counted righteous in Christ.

The Archangel

Thanks for the response.....Federal headship is not the total defining picture of our relationship with God through Adam or Jesus. The following verses and many others would stand on their own in establishing a saving relationship without Federal headship.Again, it can be seen as one aspect among many.

1 john:1My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.


Romans 3:25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,i through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

If I followed your point,though, I could then argue that the salvation violates any fairness, righteousness,mercy, justice,love etc for those who cannot choose to change headship.:love2:
 

michael-acts17:11

Member
Site Supporter
I've always wrestled with the idea of an age of accountability. If we truly believe Romans 3:23, how do we say that any person of any age will attain eternal life without belief in Christ? If we say that babies cannot believe; therefore they must have a special dispensation, then must we also accept that those adults who have never even heard the name of Jesus Christ are equally unable to believe? It is a difficult issue to reconcile; especially in light of the word "all".
 

The Archangel

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the response.....Federal headship is not the total defining picture of our relationship with God through Adam or Jesus. The following verses and many others would stand on their own in establishing a saving relationship without Federal headship.Again, it can be seen as one aspect among many.

1 john:1My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. But if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous. 2He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world.


Romans 3:25God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement,i through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice, because in his forbearance he had left the sins committed beforehand unpunished— 26he did it to demonstrate his justice at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.

If I followed your point,though, I could then argue that the salvation violates any fairness, righteousness,mercy, justice,love etc for those who cannot choose to change headship.:love2:

What is the point, might I ask, you are trying to make by posting these two verses?

The Archangel
 

Cypress

New Member
You can! I used them to simply show relationship outside of Pauls headship line of example. Systematic theology is useful to me and millions others, but can be harmful as well if it can hinder simple faith.:love2:
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Part of the challenge here is that you (and others) miss one simple point: We are not directly created in God's image.
Genesis 9:6 (post fall)“Whoever sheds human blood,
by humans shall their blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made mankind.
 

Amy.G

New Member
Genesis 9:6 (post fall)“Whoever sheds human blood,
by humans shall their blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made mankind.

Exactly. I've heard of this "procreated" in Adam's image stuff before, but I don't think it's correct.
 

glfredrick

New Member
Exactly. I've heard of this "procreated" in Adam's image stuff before, but I don't think it's correct.

Have you ever heard of a sinless human? The Bible says that is impossible.

I understand the desire to somehow make sense of the fact that God holds us culpable for something we are born into, but He does.

One thing that helps me to think about this issue is that if (when) I stand before the throne of God and have my entire life played back and contrasted to His Perfect Holiness, I will implicate myself as a sinner. In other words, I will completely agree with God about my born state, for it will be clearly evident from that vantage point that I am EXACTLY what God says I am.

Oh, praise God, that He did not leave me in that state! Through no effort of my own, He graced me with life and imputed righteousness so that when I do stand before His throne, I do so without condemnation.

One of the primary points I keep seeing is that people are trying to make it seem as if there is SOME good point within them that gives them the right to approach God; i.e., that we are not sinners until we sin, that we are born "innocent," etc. There is no good thing in us, and we do not "come to God" based on any act of human righteousness.

Our case is WORSE than many of you think! We have NO HOPE except that God act on our behalf!
 

Amy.G

New Member
Have you ever heard of a sinless human? The Bible says that is impossible.
No. But the bible says we are created in God's image, so I believe it. Being in His "image" does not mean that I am exactly like God. I have never read where we are created in Adam's image, but maybe I missed it. :)

I understand the desire to somehow make sense of the fact that God holds us culpable for something we are born into, but He does.
I have no problem accepting the fact that I am responsible for my sin. I do not blame God or anyone.
One thing that helps me to think about this issue is that if (when) I stand before the throne of God and have my entire life played back and contrasted to His Perfect Holiness, I will implicate myself as a sinner. In other words, I will completely agree with God about my born state, for it will be clearly evident from that vantage point that I am EXACTLY what God says I am.
Me too.

Oh, praise God, that He did not leave me in that state! Through no effort of my own, He graced me with life and imputed righteousness so that when I do stand before His throne, I do so without condemnation.
Me too. In Christ alone!

One of the primary points I keep seeing is that people are trying to make it seem as if there is SOME good point within them that gives them the right to approach God; i.e., that we are not sinners until we sin, that we are born "innocent," etc. There is no good thing in us, and we do not "come to God" based on any act of human righteousness.
There is no good thing in me, but when it comes to infants, God does not hold them accountable for the sins of another. They are covered by the blood of Christ out of the mercy of God.


Our case is WORSE than many of you think! We have NO HOPE except that God act on our behalf!
Absolutely! You will get no argument from me.
 

glfredrick

New Member
I am curious why you think that we are being held accountable for the sins of another?

Yes, in Adam, all are born sinners, but we are held accountable for our own sin.

Is it that you think that an infant cannot possibly sin? That is not true, and we had a long debate on that topic before. The moment an infant screams with that "me first" cry, they've already entered the realm of sin -- for most at the second we exit the birth canal, but even if not, there are no such things as "innocent" oersons on this earth.

The concept of "innocent" has to stem from the fact that you may see sin as a concious effort, but what if we sin without realizing it? In many a conversation with those who hold that they're salvation is wrapped around a continual confession and "cleaning the slate" I've not met many who admit that they can sin without even knowing it (and I'm not saying you are in this camp), but this is easily possible. We can walk right by someone that God intended for us to love. We can fail to cut a check to some mission agency at exactly the moment that would have furthered one critical goal. We be preoccupied and neglect to lift someone up in prayer as God intends. The list is as long as there are humans with needs and infants are not immune.

12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— 13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. Romans 5:12-14 (ESV)

In doing this the apostle admits, as an undoubted and well understood fact,

1. That sin came into the world by one man, and death as the consequence, Romans 5:12.

2. That death had passed on all; even on those who had not the light of revelation, and the express commands of God, Romans 5:13,14.

3. That Adam was the figure, the type of him that was to come; that there was some sort of analogy or resemblance between the results of his act, and the results of the work of Christ. That analogy consisted in the fact that the effects of his doings did not terminate on himself, but extended to numberless other persons, and that it was thus with the work of Christ, Romans 5:14. But he shows,

4. That there were very material and important differences in the two cases. There was not a perfect parallelism. The effects of the work of Christ were far more than simply to counteract the evil introduced by the sin of Adam. The differences between the effect of his act and the work of Christ are these:

(1.) The sin of Adam led to condemnation. The work of Christ has an opposite tendency, Romans 5:15.

(2.) The condemnation which came from the sin of Adam was the result of one offence. The work of Christ was to deliver from many offences, Romans 5:16.

(3.) The work of Christ was far more abundant and overflowing in its influence. It extended deeper and farther. It was more than a compensation for the evils of the fall, Romans 5:17.

5. As the act of Adam threw its influence over all men to secure their condemnation, so the work of Christ was fitted to affect all men, Jews and Gentiles, in bringing them into a state by which they might be delivered from the fall, and restored to the favour of God. It was in itself adapted to produce far more and greater benefits than the crime of Adam had clone evil; and was thus a glorious plan, just fitted to meet the actual condition of a world of sin; and to repair the evils which apostasy had introduced. It had thus the evidence that it originated in the benevolence of God, and that it was adapted to the human condition, Romans 5:18-21.

—Barnes' Notes on the New Testament

Of note is the fact that Barnes is an Arminian.

Hodge, a Calvinist, says this:

The course of the argument. As the point to be illustrated is the justification of sinners on the ground of the righteousness of Christ, and the source of illustration is the fall of all men in Adam, the passage begins with a statement of this latter truth: ‘As on account of one man, death has passed on all men; so on account of one,’ etc., ver. 12. Before carrying out the comparison, however, the apostle stops to establish his position that all men are condemned on account of the sin of Adam. His proof is this: The infliction of a penalty implies the transgression of a law, since sin is not imputed where there is no law, ver. 13. All mankind are subject to death or penal evils; therefore all men are regarded as transgressors of a law, ver. 13. This law or covenant, which brings death on all men, is not the law of Moses, because multitudes died before that was given, ver. 14. Nor is it the law of nature written upon the heart, since multitudes die who have never violated even that law, ver. 14. Therefore, as neither of these laws is sufficiently extensive to embrace all the subjects of the penalty, we must conclude that men are subject to death on account of Adam; that is, it is for the offense of one that many die, vers. 13, 14. Adam is, therefore, a type of Christ. As to this important point, there is a striking analogy between the fall and redemption. We are condemned in Adam, and we are justified in Christ. But the cases are not completely parallel. In the first place, the former dispensation is much more mysterious than the latter; for if by the offense of one many die, Much More by the righteousness of one shall many live, ver. 15. In the second place, the benefits of the one dispensation far exceed the evils of the other. For the condemnation was for one offense; the justification is from many. Christ saves us from much more than the guilt of Adam’s sin, ver. 16. In the third place, Christ not only saves us from death, that is, not only frees us from the evils consequent on our own and Adam’s sin, but introduces us into a state of positive and eternal blessedness, ver. 17. Or this verse may be considered as an amplification of the sentiment of ver. 15.
Having thus limited and illustrated the analogy between Adam and Christ, the apostle resumes and carries the comparison fully out: ‘Therefore, as on account of one man all men are condemned; so on account of one, all are justified,’ ver. 18. ‘For, as through the disobedience of one, many are regarded and treated as sinners; so through the righteousness of one many are regarded and treated as righteous,’ ver. 19. This then is the sense of the passage—men are condemned for the sin of one man, and justified for the righteousness of another. If men are thus justified by the obedience of Christ, for what purpose is the law? ‘It entered that sin might abound,’ i.e. that men might see how much it abounded; since by the law is the knowledge of sin. The law has its use, although men are not justified by their own obedience to it, ver. 20. As the law discloses, and even aggravates the dreadful triumphs of sin reigning, in union with death, over the human family, the gospel displays the far more effectual and extensive triumphs of grace through Jesus Christ our Lord, ver. 21.
—Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans
 

The Archangel

Well-Known Member
Genesis 9:6 (post fall)“Whoever sheds human blood,
by humans shall their blood be shed;
for in the image of God
has God made mankind.

Webdog,

I'm not sure what your point is. I assume you are trying to refute my statement that man is (post fall) still "created" in the image of God.

But, you conveniently skip over what Genesis 5 says. I'll post that in my response to Amy (below).

Exactly. I've heard of this "procreated" in Adam's image stuff before, but I don't think it's correct.

No. But the bible says we are created in God's image, so I believe it. Being in His "image" does not mean that I am exactly like God. I have never read where we are created in Adam's image, but maybe I missed it. :)

Amy,

The idea that we are "pro-created" in Adam's image is absolutely biblical. See this passage from Genesis 5:
[5:1] This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. [2] Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. [3] When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. (Genesis 5:1-3 ESV)
In this passage we have Adam and Eve being created in the image of God. Then, in the post-fall world, we have the rest of us who are like Seth--in Adam's image and likeness.

So, while it is true that we are still image bearers (because God has created us to image Him) we are not primarily in His image now. We are in Adam's image. All his sinful rebellion, etc. is passed to us because he is our "father." Again, this is why Paul's use of the dichotomy between "in Adam" and "in Christ" is so significant.

The Archangel
 

glfredrick

New Member
The idea that we are "pro-created" in Adam's image is absolutely biblical. See this passage from Genesis 5:
[5:1] This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. [2] Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. [3] When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. (Genesis 5:1-3 ESV)
In this passage we have Adam and Eve being created in the image of God. Then, in the post-fall world, we have the rest of us who are like Seth--in Adam's image and likeness.

So, while it is true that we are still image bearers (because God has created us to image Him) we are not primarily in His image now. We are in Adam's image. All his sinful rebellion, etc. is passed to us because he is our "father." Again, this is why Paul's use of the dichotomy between "in Adam" and "in Christ" is so significant.

The Archangel

Indeed... We regain that imago Dei when we are made one with Christ, though not fully (already, but not yet) until our future glorification when we complete the process of salvation and restoration of the image of God.
 

Amy.G

New Member
Webdog,

I'm not sure what your point is. I assume you are trying to refute my statement that man is (post fall) still "created" in the image of God.

But, you conveniently skip over what Genesis 5 says. I'll post that in my response to Amy (below).





Amy,

The idea that we are "pro-created" in Adam's image is absolutely biblical. See this passage from Genesis 5:
[5:1] This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. [2] Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. [3] When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. (Genesis 5:1-3 ESV)
In this passage we have Adam and Eve being created in the image of God. Then, in the post-fall world, we have the rest of us who are like Seth--in Adam's image and likeness.

So, while it is true that we are still image bearers (because God has created us to image Him) we are not primarily in His image now. We are in Adam's image. All his sinful rebellion, etc. is passed to us because he is our "father." Again, this is why Paul's use of the dichotomy between "in Adam" and "in Christ" is so significant.

The Archangel

I see what you're saying. I hadn't thought of it that way before.

See, I'm not too stubborn to learn! :)
 

The Archangel

Well-Known Member
Indeed... We regain that imago Dei when we are made one with Christ, though not fully (already, but not yet) until our future glorification when we complete the process of salvation and restoration of the image of God.

ABSOLUTELY! Good words. Thank you.

The Archangel
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Having the sin nature passed from Adam does not mean we are made in his image. Jesus used the imagery on a coin to show man is made in God's image when He asked who's image was on the coin and said to give unto God that which is God's.

Being "in Adam" does not mean we are made in Adam's image, it means our condition is the same as Adam's.
 

Winman

Active Member
Having the sin nature passed from Adam does not mean we are made in his image. Jesus used the imagery on a coin to show man is made in God's image when He asked who's image was on the coin and said to give unto God that which is God's.

Being "in Adam" does not mean we are made in Adam's image, it means our condition is the same as Adam's.


Good observation Webdog, I never caught that before.

There are also NT verses that still say man is the image of God.

1 Cor 11: 7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

Paul is speaking of the present, not the past.

Jam 3:9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.

James is speaking of the present.
 

michael-acts17:11

Member
Site Supporter
Based upon the stated belief that the sin nature is present before birth, do babies go to heaven or hell when they die? Upon what Scripture do you base that belief?
 

webdog

Active Member
Site Supporter
Based upon the stated belief that the sin nature is present before birth, do babies go to heaven or hell when they die? Upon what Scripture do you base that belief?
Romans 7. We don't spiritually die for having a sin nature, we spiritually die in the same manner Adam did...by breaking God's law. Believers still have a sin nature yet we are not spiritually dead. We will die physically, though, part of the curse of having such a nature.
 

michael-acts17:11

Member
Site Supporter
Romans 7. We don't spiritually die for having a sin nature, we spiritually die in the same manner Adam did...by breaking God's law. Believers still have a sin nature yet we are not spiritually dead. We will die physically, though, part of the curse of having such a nature.

I generally agree with you, but that is rather vague. Could you state where babies go with Scripture?
 

The Archangel

Well-Known Member
Having the sin nature passed from Adam does not mean we are made in his image. Jesus used the imagery on a coin to show man is made in God's image when He asked who's image was on the coin and said to give unto God that which is God's.

Being "in Adam" does not mean we are made in Adam's image, it means our condition is the same as Adam's.

I'm not claiming that having a sin nature means we were made in his image. We were procreated in Adam's image and that is why we have a sin nature. I'm not "theologising" this; that we are in Adam's image is clearly stated in Genesis 5:
[5:1] This is the book of the generations of Adam. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God. [2] Male and female he created them, and he blessed them and named them Man when they were created. [3] When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth. (Genesis 5:1-3 ESV)
See v. 3: "[Adam] fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image."

The Archangel
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top