The coupe de grace of deniers of original sin

[convicted1]

What an amazing arguement! At some point in time, between birth and whenever, that child will commit sin. Period. That child will need to be born again. Some of these statement sound very huministic, and or human pyschology, no scripture.

I agree with this.

 

[convicted1]

The problem here is the definition of sin. Those who deny that man fell in Adam and possess a sinful nature from birth define sin but one way - willful transgression (1 Jn. 4:6). If that were the only definition of sin they might have a better case.

However, sin is also defined by OMISSION or coming short of God's glory (Rom. 3:23) and that by necessity defines sin by anything that does not measure up to God's own moral righteousness begining with the intent of the heart to the action performed.

1. The intent of the heart is included in such commands to love the Lord thy God with ALL thine heart, soul, mind, etc.

2. The intent of the heart is included and defined by such passages as that deal with purpose for why and what you do:

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Col 3:23 And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;

This is precisely why men are sinners by nature and not just by actions because the intent of their hearts comes under the definition of sin. This is why infants are born with a sinful nature because they do not do anything for the glory of God, and thus come short of the glory of God in everything they do.

And which of these can a baby knowingly do, whether it be good or bad? We are held accountable for the sins we commit. What sin(s) can a new born babe commit, and know it is a transgression of God's laws?

 

[The Biblicist]

And which of these can a baby knowingly do, whether it be good or bad? We are held accountable for the sins we commit. What sin(s) can a new born babe commit, and know it is a transgression of God's laws?

You missed the point! You are still operating on the definition that sin is WILLFUL COMMISSION!

 

[convicted1]

You missed the point! You are still operating on the definition that sin is WILLFUL COMMISSION!

Nope. Sin IS a transgression of God's laws, yes or no. We are accountable for OUR sins and no one else.

 

[The Biblicist]

The problem here is the definition of sin. Those who deny that man fell in Adam and possess a sinful nature from birth define sin but one way - willful transgression (1 Jn. 4:6). If that were the only definition of sin they might have a better case.

However, sin is also defined by OMISSION or coming short of God's glory (Rom. 3:23) and that by necessity defines sin by anything that does not measure up to God's own moral righteousness begining with the intent of the heart to the action performed.

1. The intent of the heart is included in such commands to love the Lord thy God with ALL thine heart, soul, mind, etc.

2. The intent of the heart is included and defined by such passages as that deal with purpose for why and what you do:

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Col 3:23 And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;

This is precisely why men are sinners by nature and not just by actions because the intent of their hearts comes under the definition of sin. This is why infants are born with a sinful nature because they do not do anything for the glory of God, and thus come short of the glory of God in everything they do.

This is precisely why Jesus says sin originates from the heart (Mt. 15) not the actions.

This is why Jesus said "there IS NONE good but one and that is God."

This is why Job said,

Job 14:4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one. 5 Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with thee, thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass;......Job 15: What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?

This is why David said,

Psa. 58:2 Yea, in heart ye work wickedness; ye weigh the violence of your hands in the earth.
3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.

Those who oppose indwelling sin by birth do so by primarily defining sin as a WILLFUL CHOICE rather than OMISSION of right intent or purpose! Sin in infants is not merely revealed by what they do but what they come short of by intent behind all they do!

 

[convicted1]

Those who oppose indwelling sin by birth do so by primarily defining sin as a WILLFUL CHOICE rather than OMISSION of right intent or purpose! Sin in infants is not merely revealed by what they do but what they come short of by intent behind all they do!

Where does the sin in infants come from?

 

[The Biblicist]

Where does the sin in infants come from?

"BY one man's offence MANY WERE MADE SINNERS"
"BY one man's offence MANY BE DEAD"
"For IN Adam all die"

However, your interpretation of the origin of sin in infants makes these scriptures read thus:

"by MANY OFFENCES many were made sinners"
"by MANY OFFENCES many be dead"

 

[The Biblicist]

Nope. Sin IS a transgression of God's laws, yes or no. We are accountable for OUR sins and no one else.

No one denied that this is ONE Biblical definition of ONE type of sin - willful transgression.

However, that is not the only Bibical definition and that is not the only type of sin recognized and defined by Scriptures.

You restrict sin to one definition when the Bible does not!

 

[convicted1]

"BY one man's offence MANY WERE MADE SINNERS"
"BY one man's offence MANY BE DEAD"
"For IN Adam all die"

However, your interpretation of the origin of sin in infants makes these scriptures read thus:

"by MANY OFFENCES many were made sinners"
"by MANY OFFENCES many be dead"

Okay, think on thes two questions I pose to you.

Where does the fleshly man come from?

Where does the soul come from?

 

[convicted1]

No one denied that this is ONE Biblical definition of ONE type of sin - willful transgression.

However, that is not the only Bibical definition and that is not the only type of sin recognized and defined by Scriptures.

You restrict sin to one definition when the Bible does not!

Sin IS sin, period. Sin is a transgression of God's law. Murder, lying, cheating, stealing, adultery/fornication, omission, all of these fall under "unbelief".

 

[The Biblicist]

Okay, think on thes two questions I pose to you.

Where does the fleshly man come from?

Where does the soul come from?

Both are inseparable aspects of human nature derived from fallen Adam. We are not products of the unfallen Adam but "by one man's offence we were made...."

 

[convicted1]

Both are inseparable aspects of human nature derived from fallen Adam. We are not products of the unfallen Adam but "by one man's offence we were made...."

Again, what are the sources of the flesh and soul? Does the flesh come from the cursed ground, or does the soul? Does the soul come from God, or from the cursed ground? Which are the only viable answers?

 

[The Biblicist]

Sin IS sin, period. Sin is a transgression of God's law. Murder, lying, cheating, stealing, adultery/fornication, omission, all of these fall under "unbelief".

Sin is sin, period! However, not all sin is the same kind of sin. There is sin of commission - willful definance in knowling transgressing the law - 1 Jn. 2:6

There is also sin by omission and this is explicitly stated in Romans 3:23 where sin i s "coming short of the glory of God" or failing to do POSITIVELY what the law requires! There is sin by coming short of all that LOVE requires!!! Wrong INTENT of heart is sin! Everything done from wrong INTENT of heart is sin whether it is done knowingly and willfully or sincerely and ignorantly.

You are picking parts of the Bible to believe and rejecting other parts and that is precisely what you must continue to do in order to justify your doctrine.

 

[convicted1]

Sin is sin, period! However, not all sin is the same kind of sin. There is sin of commission - willful definance in knowling transgressing the law - 1 Jn. 2:6

There is also sin by omission and this is explicitly stated in Romans 3:23 where sin i s "coming short of the glory of God" or failing to do POSITIVELY what the law requires!

You are picking parts of the Bible to believe and rejecting other parts and that is precisely what you must continue to do in order to justify your doctrine.

I don't have to try to justify anything, Brother. Sin IS sin. You are trying to quantify sin, where the bible doesn't. One sin will put you in hell the same as a million will. It's not how many sins you commit that makes you a sinner, but sin, period.

 

[The Biblicist]

The problem here is the definition of sin. Those who deny that man fell in Adam and possess a sinful nature from birth define sin but one way - willful transgression (1 Jn. 4:6). If that were the only definition of sin they might have a better case.

However, sin is also defined by OMISSION or coming short of God's glory (Rom. 3:23) and that by necessity defines sin by anything that does not measure up to God's own moral righteousness begining with the intent of the heart to the action performed.

1. The intent of the heart is included in such commands to love the Lord thy God with ALL thine heart, soul, mind, etc.

2. The intent of the heart is included and defined by such passages as that deal with purpose for why and what you do:

1Co 10:31 Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.

Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Col 3:23 And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men;

This is precisely why men are sinners by nature and not just by actions because the intent of their hearts comes under the definition of sin. This is why infants are born with a sinful nature because they do not do anything for the glory of God, and thus come short of the glory of God in everything they do.

This is precisely why Jesus says sin originates from the heart (Mt. 15) not the actions.

This is why Jesus said "there IS NONE good but one and that is God."

This is why Job said,

Job 14:4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one. 5 Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with thee, thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass;......Job 15: What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?

This is why David said,

Psa. 58:2 Yea, in heart ye work wickedness; ye weigh the violence of your hands in the earth.
3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.

Your doctrine is built upon half truth. The above post provides the fuller Biblical definition of sin and its proper application to all men who all enter the world as infants.

Bottom line is Jesus said "There is NONE good BUT ONE and that IS GOD" and your doctrine denies what Christ said is the truth. You believe all infants are born good and therefore intrinsic goodness cannot be limited to merely "ONE" and that "IS GOD"

 

[savedbymercy]

Where does the sin in infants come from?

In their Representative head ! When Adam sinned, all whom He represented sin also according to God's word. Rom 5:12,19

12Wherefore, 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:

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

The word sinner here is the greek word hamartōlos:


devoted to sin, a sinner

a) not free from sin

b) pre-eminently sinful, especially wicked

1) all wicked men

2) specifically of men stained with certain definite vices or crimes

a) tax collectors, heathen

This word is from the root word hamartanō:


to be without a share in

2) to miss the mark

3) to err, be mistaken

4) to miss or wander from the path of uprightness and honour, to do or go wrong

5) to wander from the law of God, violate God's law, sin

And since it means violate God's Law, it also can be rendered Adam's Transgression Rom 5:14

14Nevertheless 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.

Transgression here is the word parabasis:

a going over

2) metaph. a disregarding, violating

So all who were in Adam, and God constituted him their head, when he sinned or transgressed, they did also, before they were born. Now when they were born they were born as infants, with their transgression already having been committed in Adam their head, this is according to scripture truth whether you, me or anyone else believes it or not !

 

[convicted1]

In their Representative head ! When Adam sinned, all whom He represented sin also according to God's word. Rom 5:12,19

12Wherefore, 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:

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

The word sinner here is the greek word hamartōlos:


devoted to sin, a sinner

a) not free from sin

b) pre-eminently sinful, especially wicked

1) all wicked men

2) specifically of men stained with certain definite vices or crimes

a) tax collectors, heathen

This word is from the root word hamartanō:


to be without a share in

2) to miss the mark

3) to err, be mistaken

4) to miss or wander from the path of uprightness and honour, to do or go wrong

5) to wander from the law of God, violate God's law, sin

And since it means violate God's Law, it also can be rendered Adam's Transgression Rom 5:14

14Nevertheless 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.

Transgression here is the word parabasis:

a going over

2) metaph. a disregarding, violating

So all who were in Adam, and God constituted him their head, when he sinned or transgressed, they did also, before they were born. Now when they were born they were born as infants, with their transgression already having been committed in Adam their head, this is according to scripture truth whether you, me or anyone else believes it or not !

Oooookaaaayyy! God gives the new born babe a sin cursed soul? That's scary!!

 

[The Biblicist]

Oooookaaaayyy! God gives the new born babe a sin cursed soul? That's scary!!

Who said God gave the baby it? He got it as a free gift from his father Adam? It was passed down to him through the reproduction after his kind cycle. Will you blame God for Adam's sin also?

 

[convicted1]

Your doctrine is built upon half truth. The above post provides the fuller Biblical definition of sin and its proper application to all men who all enter the world as infants.

Bottom line is Jesus said "There is NONE good BUT ONE and that IS GOD" and your doctrine denies what Christ said is the truth. You believe all infants are born good and therefore intrinsic goodness cannot be limited to merely "ONE" and that "IS GOD"

You missed your calling as a politician, and/or, lawyer, putting words in my mouth. I agree that there is none good. The physical body is born with the stain of sin because of Adam, and that body will die. The soul comes from God, and is not born "guilty", but "not guilty", seeing that it came from God(Ezek. 18:4). When the soul is shown it has become a sinner, God will show that person they are willfully sinning, and from that point forward, needs to be reconciled back to Him.

 

[convicted1]

Who said God gave the baby it? He got it as a free gift from his father Adam? It was passed down to him through the reproduction after his kind cycle. Will you blame God for Adam's sin also?

Does the soul come from God or not?