How to deal with Christ not inheriting Mary's sin nature

[padredurand]

I've never heard a newborn speak anything.

The fact sin is lawlessness should cement the fact a newborn is not a sinner.

webdog, please forgive my Wesleyan perspective here but I paid a LOT for that degree and need to get my money's worth...

Wesley defines sin as a "willful transgression of a known law of God." Without spending three years working through it, the emphasis is on the willful transgression. Newborns don't willfully transgress any law. Three year olds certainly do! Can a three year old comprehend they are willfully transgressing a known law of God? More than likely not.

Back to my roots:

London Confession Article 6 The Fall of Man, Sin and Punishment

3. They being the root, and by God's appointment, standing in the room and stead of all mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and their corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation. Their descendants are therefore conceived in sin, and are by nature the children of wrath, the servants of sin, and the subjects of death and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus sets them free.

4. All actual transgressions proceed from this original corruption, by which we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil.

I believe the two views to be complimentary. There is a clear delineation between a sinful nature and an actual, willful transgression. Newborns don't willfully transgress a know law of God but, again, the don't stay newborn for long.

 

[agedman]

Quite true.
Preaching to the pagan Greeks in Athens, Paul said:

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

God doesn't give commands that are impossible to obey.

Really?

God didn't demand fruit off a tree when it wasn't the season for the tree to bear?

What happened to the tree?

What of God temporarily blinding the eyes of the Israeli for the sole purpose of presenting the Gospel to the Gentiles - yet He requires belief?

DHK, are there not now two examples given to show God does require what cannot be fulfilled?

 

[DHK]

Really?

God didn't demand fruit off a tree when it wasn't the season for the tree to bear?

What happened to the tree?

What of God temporarily blinding the eyes of the Israeli for the sole purpose of presenting the Gospel to the Gentiles - yet He requires belief?

DHK, are there not now two examples given to show God does require what cannot be fulfilled?

I am sorry, but I don't find Paul explaining those concepts to pagan Greeks. If you do please direct me to the passage, otherwise they become irrelevant.

 

[preacher4truth]

Quite true.

Quite false actually.

Preaching to the pagan Greeks in Athens, Paul said:

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

Yes, we get it. YOU repented in your ability, as it was possible for you, who were dead in sins to obey and do so. Your teaching is contrary to the truth that repentance itself is a gift of God. But in your philosophy you did it, it was possible within you. This is what you teach.

God doesn't give commands that are impossible to obey.

And those of truth see the foundation of your error in your above quote. God most certainly has given to mankind things impossible to obey.

 

[preacher4truth]

Really?

God didn't demand fruit off a tree when it wasn't the season for the tree to bear?

What happened to the tree?

What of God temporarily blinding the eyes of the Israeli for the sole purpose of presenting the Gospel to the Gentiles - yet He requires belief?

DHK, are there not now two examples given to show God does require what cannot be fulfilled?

:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

Refreshing.

 

[DHK]

Yes, we get it. YOU repented in your ability, as it was possible for you, who were dead in sins to obey and do so. Your teaching is contrary to the truth that repentance itself is a gift of God. But in your philosophy you did it, it was possible within you. This is what you teach.

Faith and repentance are two sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other, when speaking of faith from a Biblical point of view. However, there is no verse in the Bible that says faith is a gift of God to the unsaved. I have challenged you on that many times, and you have failed to deliver. You just demand that it be so.
Sorry, I don't bow to your dogmatic statements even if they were "Calvin-approved."

And those of truth see the foundation of your error in your above quote. God most certainly has given to mankind things impossible to obey.

"Those of truth" are Calvinists of course. That only shows arrogance on your part. Sad.

 

[preacher4truth]

Faith and repentance are two sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other, when speaking of faith from a Biblical point of view. However, there is no verse in the Bible that says faith is a gift of God to the unsaved. I have challenged you on that many times, and you have failed to deliver. You just demand that it be so.

Not at all. In all actuality it is you who fails to deliver. Your theology is about the same level of 'strength' of SDAism and other isms. In fact these have schooled you on BB and I see little distinction between their theology and yours. This is why you butt heads with them on here daily. You all share the same basis of theological error.

That said, faith is in fact a gift and it is plain to see in Scripture which causes pause as to why you don't see it.

Sorry, I don't bow to your dogmatic statements even if they were "Calvin-approved."

I've not read Calvin.

"Those of truth" are Calvinists of course. That only shows arrogance on your part. Sad.

Actually it shows yours.

 

[quantumfaith]

Quite true.
Preaching to the pagan Greeks in Athens, Paul said:

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

God doesn't give commands that are impossible to obey.

I will do as someone else.....Thanks DHK for your objectivity.

 

[quantumfaith]

Quite false actually.



Yes, we get it. YOU repented in your ability, as it was possible for you, who were dead in sins to obey and do so. Your teaching is contrary to the truth that repentance itself is a gift of God. But in your philosophy you did it, it was possible within you. This is what you teach.



And those of truth see the foundation of your error in your above quote. God most certainly has given to mankind things impossible to obey.

The height of arrogance is for you to claim that YOU are the one who is the keeper of truth. You can disagree, and state your case but DO NOT claim you are the standard of theological truth.

 

[Winman]

Are you kidding me???? Do you not believe that we came into this world born into sin???? The Bible says this.

A. Psa 58:3-The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies.
B. Rm 3:10-12-as it is written: None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands;
no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
no one does good, not even one.
C. Rm 3:23-For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
D. 1 Jn 3:4-Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

None of these scriptures supports Original Sin.

Psa 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
4 Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;
5 Which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so wisely.
6 Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O LORD.
7 Let them melt away as waters which run continually: when he bendeth his bow to shoot his arrows, let them be as cut in pieces.
8 As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun.

Psa 58 is hyperbole or exaggeration. If you read vs. 3 as literal, you have to read the following verses as literal and believe that children are poisonous like an adder, have huge teeth like a lion, and melt like a snail. You also have to believe that David was asking all children everywhere to perish.

Romans 3:10-12 does not say we are born sinners, it simply says man has not done good.

If I said my neighbors never go to church, no, not one, would you understand that to men they are unable to go to church? NO, no sensible person would assume that, but that is exactly what you are doing, you are assuming total inability and reading it into scripture where no such thing is being said.

Not one of these scriptures you posted supports Original Sin in any way at all.

 

[preacher4truth]

Faith

Yes, we still get it, you repented in your ability, it was possible for you when Scripture says it is a gift, and says there is no room for boasting, and that faith itself (ability to believe) is also a gift.

Herein we can see in your teaching another gospel. Preaching to others to DO something they CAN do in THEIR ability and THEN they will be saved.

Yes, we get it perfectly: DO this THEN I will save you. Wow.

 

[DHK]

I will do as someone else.....Thanks DHK for your objectivity.

Thank you.
I try to give Scripture to back up my position.

P4T said:

"That said, faith is in fact a gift and it is plain to see in Scripture which causes pause as to why you don't see it."

If it is plain to see in Scripture, I wonder why he can't post any Scripture for all to plainly see?

 

[percho]

I see bits and pieces of truth in this thread.

Jesus did not have an earthly father because He was born of a virgin.
Was this simply a sign? No. It fulfilled prophecy.

Is our sin nature passed down physically by either our father or mother or both? No, our sin nature is passed down spiritually. When Adam sinned, both Adam and Eve's eyes were opened, thus they both became corrupted. When God forms our human spirit within us, it is in a separated from God state, i.e. conceived in iniquity.

Romans 5:12, "Just as through one man sin entered into the world...."
Adam sinned and because of that sin, the many were made sinners. Thus through the sin of the one, the consequence is applied to the many. But this verse does not say how it spread, biologically or spiritually. However, since it spread to Eve not through biology. the evidence supports a spiritual transaction. The judgement arose from the sin of the one, but the condemnation (God's action) was applied to the many. So just as justification is a spiritual transaction, so is the condemnation.

Question Van just for your thoughts, not trying to make a particular point. However I do believe it could be relative to the sin that took place in the Garden of Eden.

The vision and or angel speaking with Joseph.

But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins. Matt 1:20,21

Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Verse 22 which I do not know if is part of the angel's statement or not, nor the following verse which appears to be a part of the angel's statement. verse 24 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

Then the following and mu question.

Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife: And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. 25,26

Had Joseph known her before the birth of the child would that child have been conceived in iniquity?

Did Satan have tempted Eve into being known of Adam before God intended.

And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD. And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground. 4:1

Cain the older killed the younger and then.

And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew. 4:25

A seed unto what? Was Eve suppose to have been a virgin when she gave birth to her firstborn?

 

[Winman]

As you know I have refuted all your denial of scripture many times before. You simple ignore the rebuttal and post the same bogus arguments.

You have never refuted me.

We were conceived in iniquity, and therefore made sinners by God. Where were we "set in place?" Iniquity!

Again, Psa 51:5 concerns only David. It does not say all men are born sinners. And as I already explained, this verse is about David's mother.

No one said we are born sinners, we are made sinners at conception, before we are born. Every aborted baby has been conceived in iniquity, before they have done anything good or bad.

No, we are "made" sinners when we sin like Adam. Likewise, we are imputed righteous when we trust Jesus as he trusted his Father.

Luk 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

Are we believers at conception or condemned at conception for unbelief? John 3:18

We are "upright" at conception;

Ecc 7:29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.

When we are conceived, were we by nature children of wrath? Ephesians 2:1-3

No, we become children of wrath when we walk in sin as the prodigal son did.

And again, scripture does not say we were born sinners, it says we were made sinners, conceived in iniquity and by nature children of wrath, condemned already due to lack of belief.

Nature often means lifestyle, not how we are born. This is what Ephesians is saying that we became children of wrath because we "walked" in sin.

Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

Ephesians 2 does not say we are born dead in sin, it says we are dead in sin WHEREIN IN TIME PAST YE WALKED. It is plain as day.

Men are born upright, but all men choose to go astray in sin, and this is when we become children of wrath.

 

[preacher4truth]

Thank you.
I try to give Scripture to back up my position.

P4T said:

"That said, faith is in fact a gift and it is plain to see in Scripture which causes pause as to why you don't see it."

If it is plain to see in Scripture, I wonder why he can't post any Scripture for all to plainly see?

You've been presented Scripture to prove this for years, but you reject it and supplant the truth with your dissident gospel of inherent ability. You teach doing something in your own ability (repenting and believing) and were thusly rewarded with salvation for your doing. God told you what to do, you DID it and then you were rewarded.

Congrats!!!! :thumbs:

Yes. Anti-cal theology -- turning the gift of salvation into a reward for hundreds of years.

 

[DHK]

You've been presented Scripture to prove this for years, but you reject it and supplant the truth with your dissident gospel of inherent ability. You teach doing something in your own ability (repenting and believing) and were thusly rewarded with salvation for your doing.

Yes. Anti-cal theology -- turning the gift of salvation into a reward for hundreds of years.

Another Scriptureless post. You are just avoiding the subject because you have no answer. That is quite evident.

Again: God does not give commands that are impossible for man to obey.

 

[preacher4truth]

Another Scriptureless post. You are just avoiding the subject because you have no answer. That is quite evident.

Again: God does not give commands that are impossible for man to obey.

Why would I give you more Scripture to wrest? Haven't you wrested it enough, or, do you want to continue to do so even tonight?

God has given many commands that are impossible for man to keep. Yet you, in your man-centric gospel believe you are able to keep them.

You also believe you repented and believed in your own ability, and subsequently rewarded for so doing.

Congrats, YOU did it --- there IS room for boasting in your gospel!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes. Anti-cal error, turning the gift of salvation into a reward for hundreds of years.

Those of truth see clearly the erroneous foundation of your teaching by your contrary statement of inherent ability.

 

[Winman]

Just so folks who casually read this thread will know.

I reject Winman's statement about David's mother being immoral.

There is really nothing in the book of Samuel or Chronicles to validate that thinking.

Nahash (other than the king of Ammon) could have been the name of Davids mother or another name for Jesse.

Rabinical writings do not clarify and neither does the word (Nahash) for it means serpent in Hebrew.

What IS a strong perhaps is that BOTH David's mother's first husband AND David's father's first wife had died.

That, typical of the brother taking to wife that of the dead brother, David's father took the brother's wife for himself - adopting the two daughters and having David as his own.

This would account for the characteristic differences, and also allow for the moral issues to be righteously resolved - unlike Winman's desire to have David's mother playing the harlot as the grandmother did (Rahab).

You are wrong, we know that Nahash the Ammonite was the father of David's two sisters.

2 Sam 17:25 And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man's son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab's mother.

We know that when Samuel came to see all the sons of Jesse that twice Jesse failed to bring David forward. This shows that David was a shame to him.

1 Sam 16:10 Again, Jesse made seven of his sons to pass before Samuel. And Samuel said unto Jesse, The LORD hath not chosen these.
11 And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and, behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Send and fetch him: for we will not sit down till he come hither.
12 And he sent, and brought him in. Now he was ruddy, and withal of a beautiful countenance, and goodly to look to. And the LORD said, Arise, anoint him: for this is he.

Nahash was still alive, so David's mother was not a widow when she married Jesse.

1 Chr 19:1 Now it came to pass after this, that Nahash the king of the children of Ammon died, and his son reigned in his stead.
2 And David said, I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of Nahash, because his father shewed kindness to me. And David sent messengers to comfort him concerning his father. So the servants of David came into the land of the children of Ammon to Hanun, to comfort him.

Nahash the Ammonite was still alive when David was a grown man, so David's mother was not his widow. She might have been divorced from him, we do not know for certain. But David's mother had relations with Nahash at some time, because he was David's two sister's father.

1 Chr 2:15 Ozem the sixth, David the seventh:
16 Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three.

 

[DHK]

Why would I give you more Scripture to wrest? Haven't you wrested it enough, or, do you want to continue to do so even tonight?

God has given many commands that are impossible for man to keep. Yet you, in your man-centric gospel believe you are able to keep them.

You also believe you repented and believed in your own ability, and subsequently rewarded for so doing.

Congrats, YOU did it --- there IS room for boasting in your gospel!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes. Anti-cal error, turning the gift of salvation into a reward for hundreds of years.

Those of truth see clearly the erroneous foundation of your teaching by your contrary statement of inherent ability.

Clarify what you are saying!

First, Are you clearly saying that you know and understand my beliefs?

Second, If yes to the above, then have you just questioned my salvation and inferred that I am not saved (against the rules).

Third, Are you accusing me of believing a "man-centric" gospel? Again, against the rules for I don't believe that. It is slander.

Answer for yourself P4T.
I don't like to be slandered and I will even report you to another moderator for this nonsense!

 

[plain_n_simple]

How to deal with Christ not inheriting Mary's sin nature? Thoughts?

Jesus did not have sin stained blood. Mary did.