Featured How human was Jesus/how much like Jesus are we

What? Are folks just supposed to take your word for this? Would you like to explain how or why post 199 is an open denial of the Christian faith and Christian Jesus?

 

Winman,
Instead of answering your entire post I will be brief.
Scripture does not contradict Scripture. I trust we can agree there.
Note well what the Scripture does say here:

Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh.
First, it was a likeness. It was not the same.
Second, it was a likeness of sinful flesh. It was not the same flesh as yours or any other human. If it were it would be sinful.
Third, it was not sinful because he was virgin born and thus avoided inheriting the sin nature. On that note he also was not conceived by a man but conceived by the Holy Spirit. His nature was thus fully man and fully divine at the same time.
Fourth, being fully divine and fully man (the God-man), how could you even dare to compare your nature with His. I consider that blasphemous.
--The word "blasphemous" means that which insults our Lord.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blasphemy

Comparing yourself, your flesh to that of Christ is most insulting, and therefore blasphemous.


Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
--There are reasons for prophecies. There was a reason that he was conceived of the Holy Spirit and not by man. If God simply wanted to perform an outstanding miracle he could have had a man give birth to a child and made it really miraculous! He chose not to do that. He chose a virgin. He avoided men altogether. Through man comes the sin nature.
The McGuffey Reader puts it this way:
"In Adam's fall;
We sinned all."

Both the concept of Original Sin and the doctrine of the Depravity of man are two of the fundamentals of the faith that have been believed on since the apostles. To deny them is to step outside of Christian Orthodoxy.

 

Yes, Jesus came in the likeness of "sinful" flesh. But he came in "the same" flesh. That is not a contradiction.

See, you believe men are born sinful, I do not. Jesus came in "the same" flesh we are all born in, which is not sinful. It is only when we sin that we become sinful. Jesus never sinned, so he only came in the likeness of sinful flesh.

As far as comparing Jesus's nature to mine, the scriptures do that. The scriptures say Jesus took on the nature of the seed of Abraham, that he was made like unto his brethren the Jews "in all things".

Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.

Whether you like it or not, the scriptures say Jesus took part of "the same" flesh and blood that we partake of, that he took on "the nature" of the seed of Abraham (not Adam), and was made like unto his brethren in "all things".

It is YOU and many others here that do not believe what scripture directly says.

And the McGuffey Reader isn't going to help you when you stand before God. If I were you, I would spend more time reading scripture. I would suggest you start with Hebrews chapter 2.

 

It is a glaring contradiction!

All flesh in sinful flesh. All flesh is born under the curse.

Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
--No Kingdom of God for Christ! He was "in the flesh;" had a "flesh nature." It was just like ours, or so you say.
--All flesh is sinful flesh.

Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
--We are born with "sinful flesh" i.e., a sinful nature of flesh, a depraved nature. You say Jesus had the same thing.

Romans 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
--Jesus walked after the flesh?? He had a flesh nature?
All flesh is sinful flesh.

Romans 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
--According to you Jesus could not please God. He had sinful flesh.

Romans 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
--Jesus also has a corrupted body, and waits for his redemption. For his flesh is like ours.

You take this passage out of context and use it again and again to contradict other passages of the Bible.
First, the book: It is called "Hebrews." It is addressed to Jewish Christians. They were discouraged because of the persecution they were receiving at the hands of both Romans and their own Jewish families. Throughout the book the author compares and contrasts the old Temple service to what we have in Christ. What we have in Christ is "better," a key word in the book.

In chapter two he is contrasting Christ to angels.
When Christ took upon himself humanity he was made lower than the angels who are spirit beings. That is one comparison.
The reason he did that is that angels cannot die; cannot taste death; have no idea of what it is to suffer for others.
The comparison: Jesus took on humanity so that he could know all these things and reassure us that he did suffer for us whereas angels could not.
In verse 14 he simply states that he took upon himself flesh and blood so that he could die for us. That is a comparison. Angels could not do that.

In verse 16 he re-emphasizes the same thing to his audience:
Hebrews 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Angels could not do what Christ did. He took upon himself flesh and blood, not the exact same nature as us, but simply flesh and blood, flesh and blood like Abraham had. He is speaking to Jewish Christians. He is appealing to their heritage now.

Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
--Note the clarification of verse 16:
He is LIKE unto his brethren, not that he has the exact same flesh, but only is LIKE his brethren. They could never be the same. They don't have the same nature. He was different. He was a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
A person with the sinful nature, with the same nature that you have Winman, does not fit this bill. Jesus did not have this nature. Understand what is being said here. Understand the context.

 

No it is not. I believe Ecc 7:29 that says we are made "upright". We are not born sinful. Jesus came in "the same" flesh we are all born in. It is only when we sin that we become "sinful". Jesus never sinned, so he never became sinful, so he only came in the "likeness" of sinful flesh. There is no contradiction whatsoever.

There is not one word in the curse that says flesh will become sinful. That is a complete invention NEVER stated in scripture anywhere.

Those are the "works" of the flesh. Yes, the flesh lusts against the spirit, but that in itself is not sinful. Jesus also had fleshly lusts and was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin. Having lusts that tempt us does not make us evil, it is actually sinning that makes us evil.

It does not say we are born sinful, that is another invention of man. You cannot find a single verse in the scriptures that say man is born sinful. You can find many scriptures that say man goes astray after birth, but none say he is born sinful. You can find scripture that says man has "become filthy" which shows a progression from good to evil, you can find scripture that says man has "corrupted" himself, which also shows a progression from good to evil, but no scripture says we are born evil. NONE.

Jesus came in the flesh and was tempted in "all points" as we are, but he never obeyed these lusts when they would have caused him to transgress God's law.

NO, Jesus DID NOT have sinful flesh, he had FLESH. You are slow to comprehend what I am saying. Jesus was flesh, just like Adam and Eve were in the garden, but he never obeyed his fleshly lusts when they would have caused him to sin. Eve did obey her fleshly lusts and did sin. But she had fleshly lusts BEFORE she sinned.

Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.

Did Eve have lusts here? YES, she showed the three worldly lusts, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. Was she sinful here? NO, she was not sinful until she actually sinned. Adam and Eve always had these fleshly lusts, yet God said they were "very good".

You and others just don't get it, it is not having lusts that make you evil, it is obeying those lusts when they cause you to break one of God's laws that makes you evil. If Eve would have walked away from the tree of knowledge, she would not have been a sinner.

Yes, God did curse creation, everything grows old and wears out, our body becomes old and sick and we die. But there is not one word about the curse affecting our moral nature. Cain, the very first man born after the "fall" had the ability to do well, God himself said so.

Gen 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Cain could have done well, God said so. And if he had chosen to do well, he would have been accepted. Total Depravity is false doctrine.

Nevertheless, we are directly told that Jesus took part of "the same" flesh and blood we all partake of. We are directly told that Jesus took on himself the nature of the seed of Abraham, who was born after the fall (not a problem for me, as I believe men are made upright), and we are told Jesus was made like unto his brethren the Jews "in all things".

It is you and others that are denying that Jesus came in the flesh. You do not do this intentionally, but that is what you are doing all the same.

You just don't get it, there are no issues once you realize Original Sin is false doctrine. It is Original Sin that forces man to say that Jesus was somehow different from from us and did not truly come in our same flesh.

 

You just don't get the Book of Hebrews do you?
The author was identifying with the Jews.
He did not come as a mighty Roman, a conquering Greek, a rich Egyptian, a philosophizing Persian, etc. He came as a JEW, a lowly Israelite, the father of whom was Abraham. He identified himself with the Jewish nation. That is what he is saying here. He is not talking about his actual flesh. He is identifying himself with the nation or race of people. He came as a Jew--the people whose lowly history is recorded in the annals of eternity in the Bible of failure after failure; rebellion after rebellion. It is shameful history. And he identifies himself with this race of people. Not only was he born in a manger! He was born to the Jewish race, i.e. of the seed of Abraham.

 

I will not ask a question.

I believe, man was created in the flesh which by nature will always summit to temptation and thus sin bringing forth death. From my previous post. Adam and thus his sons were created a little lower than the angels to die. Death comes to man in the flesh. Before the creation of Adam it had been foreordained for the Christ, who Winman correctly calls the son of David, yet is also the Son of God, therefore God in the flesh, to die for redemption.

Man and the all of creation was created subject to futility and corruption. Rom 8:20,21 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.NKJV

The flesh is corruptible and needs to be born again to be fit for the kingdom of God.

Little babies are corruptible and in need of new birth.

Death and corruption that follows, which is in the hand of the devil, Satan is what we need to be redeemed from. Which is what the verse Winman used more than once Heb 2:14 states. The Christ, who was without sin took on the nature of flesh, sinful flesh for all but the Christ the son of David and also the Son of God, so he could suffer death, the wages of sin, by shedding his precious blood, wherein is found the life of the flesh, life which comes from the Spirit God.

The battle was between God and Satan who was present on the earth in verse 3 of Genesis 1 and that battle was going to be fought through a created being in the image of his creator through which the creator could send forth his sinless Son.

Jesus was the human Son of God in the flesh.

 

It doesn't make one bit of difference, Jews are men just like any other men.

Jesus took part of "the same" flesh and blood as his fellow Jews. He took on the nature of the seed of Abraham, who was born after the fall, and he was made like unto his brethren the Jews in all things. He "suffered" being tempted, he could be touched with the "feeling" of our infirmities and was tempted in "all points" as we are, yet without sin.

Being flesh with lusts does not make you evil. Jesus was hungry after he fasted 40 days, and that is exactly why the devil tempted him to turn stones into bread. Jesus "felt" this temptation, probably more than we could ever realize. But he did not obey his flesh and therefore did not sin.

Again, Eve was tempted by the three worldly lusts shown in 1 John 2:16. They are even described in perfect order. Was she sinful at this point? NO, she was not sinful until she actually sinned.

You can disagree with my position all you want, but you cannot find fault with it, and you cannot find an inconsistency in it.

If men are born upright as I believe they are (Ecc 7:29) then Jesus could have "the same" flesh and blood as us, the same nature as us, and be made like us in all things and not be sinful.

The difference is, all men choose to sin and "become filthy", Jesus did not.

Gen 6:12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.

The word corrupted means to go from good to bad. It shows a progression.

Psa 14:3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

The scriptures repeatedly say we have gone astray, or gone out of the way, which shows we were originally in the way. They say we have "become filthy" which shows a progression from good to bad.

If you pay attention you will literally see many dozens, perhaps hundreds of verses that all show we have gone from good to bad. The scriptures do not show us originally evil.

 

It is shameful to post such blasphemous ideas on a Christian site.Dhk has offered the orthodox position....you are in unbelief.

heresy

 

You deny scripture, scripture says Jesus was made of the "seed of David according to the flesh".

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

The angel that spoke to Mary called David Jesus's father.

Luk 1:32 He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David:

Your problem is that you do not know the scriptures.

 

Yes the Jews are like other men; no one said they are not. That is not the point the author of the Book of Hebrews was making.
He was identifying Christ with the Jewish nation apart from other nations. He came as a Jew rather than a Roman, Egyptian, Greek or any other nation. He came as a Jew. That is the point he is making. The Book is written "to the Hebrews!" Remember that! Therefore the differentiation is very important.
He came from heaven.
He came as God.
He came lower than the angels.
He came as a man.
He came as an infant.
And last of all, he came as a "Jew." On one front he can identify with this race of "Jews" and their failures. And on the other it shows how low he went to be despised and rejected with what some considered to be the lowest of all races (throughout all generations there has been anti-semitism).

Yes, and so?
It was not "the same" flesh in that he had a sin nature.
It was the "the same flesh" in that he had a functioning body like the rest of us. The Spirit within him was the Holy Spirit and it was there from birth, unlike you. You needed to be saved. And you are implying that Christ needed salvation also. That is heresy!
We are born with a sin nature, at enmity with God. Therefore we need salvation. If Christ had that same nature; the same flesh, he would need to be saved. Did Christ need to be saved Winman? Did he need salvation; a second birth? Regeneration?

He did not have sinful flesh. He did not have a sin nature. He did not need to be saved. He was not born a sinner. You need to be saved; he didn't. Why? What's the difference? It is the sinful flesh! That is the difference.

She was created not born; different story.

As consistent as Swiss cheese--full of holes.

Men are not born upright. Again (just like the J.W.'s here) you are taking Scripture way out of its context. This is a bad and terrible habit.
Study the Book of Ecclesiastes before you quote from it. What is the context?
Solomon states:
Ecclesiastes 1:2 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
--That is the theme of the book, repeated often throughout the book.
It is not a Christian theme. It is secular in nature. The Christian does not consider life as emptiness and vanity. He sees it as full of joy with purpose and direction because of Christ. Solomon's theme is a secular theme and is looking at life from the outside, from a philosopher's perspective.

Note:
Ecclesiastes 1:11 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.
--This is true of the unsaved perspective on life, not the saved.

Ecclesiastes 1:13 And I gave my heart to seek and search out by wisdom concerning all things that are done under heaven: this sore travail hath God given to the sons of man to be exercised therewith.
--This is what Solomon did. He searched by his own wisdom every area of life: riches, sexual gratification, man's wisdom, materialism, etc. The conclusion--all is vanity. Not until one reaches the end of the book does he conclude with a command from God.
Ecclesiastes 12:13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.

Thus the verse you quoted is just the musings of a philosopher. Man is not upright. He is not just. And he certainly isn't born that way. You cannot keep taking Scripture out of context.

Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
--We have no choice. We are born this way. In fact we are born into the devil's family and thus must be born a second time into God's family.

Again you take Scripture out of context! When will it stop?
Corrupted by what? What event is the verse talking about?
Genesis 6:2 That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
--intermarriage between the sons of God (no doubt fallen angels) and the daughters of men. Whatever your view is on this passage, this is what is being referred to as the wickedness that brought on the "corruption." It is not referring to "Original Sin."

What you are showing is the Second law of Thermodynamics in action. Things have a tendency to get worse as time goes by. Jesus also predicted the same. He said: "When I come will I find faith on the earth." Things are going to get progressively worse. This is nothing new.
We are born evil and we die evil. We are born with a sin nature and we die with a sin nature. The nature is never eradicated until we get to heaven.
Have you ever seen "the perfect child; the perfect person; the perfect marriage"? Why? Why doesn't so-called "innocence" remain innocent? Because it was never innocent in the first place, was it? You have no answer for that argument. You have never even attempted one.

 

DHK, your posts tend to get longer and longer. I am going to answer just a few lines.

This is a perfect example of the truth being right before your eyes, but because of false doctrine you are blinded to it.

Does Isa 64:6 show we are born sinful? NO, it shows the exact opposiste.

No piece of clothing ever starts out as a filthy rag, NONE. All clothing starts out clean and whole. In time it becomes filthy and torn, but no clothing starts out that way EVER.

No leaf starts out faded and brown. All leaves begin tender, green and alive. It is only after time that a leaf withers, turns brown and dies.

No leaf starts out on the ground, all leaves are originally on the tree. Only after time do they fade and the wind breaks them off and carries them away.

This verse, like all the others I showed, shows a progression from good to evil, a progression from life to death. We are not born dead, just as no leaf is originally dead. We do not start out filthy, just as no piece of clothing starts out filthy, but clean.

The truth is right before your eyes, but because you have been taught the error of Augustine you are completely blind to it.

No, what you are seeing is a progression from life to death. All leaves start out alive, but die later. Likewise, we start out alive and clean, but sin makes us filthy and kills us. This is why Paul said he was ALIVE without the law once, but when the commandment came, sin revived and he DIED.

You will see this progression over and over again if you open your eyes.

 

Winman?

Which is the ultimate destiny of a man born of a woman, whether 1 minute old, 90 years old or presently alive?

A. Dying and going to heaven.
B. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. And inherit the kingdom of God.

What takes place at the blessed hope, of Paul?

To date only one man, born of woman, has gone from being corruptible to incorruptible. From mortal to immortal. Why? Why hasn't a pre born without sin? Why not a baby one minute old who is without sin, a clean rag?

How human was Jesus?

Does this have anything to do with Adam? Does it have anything to do with death having been appointed to man?

The carnal man is sold under sin? The carnal man needs to be redeemed.
To whom or what was he sold? Who sold him? Did he sell himself? Was he sold in order that he could be redeemed and thus destroy that unto which he had been sold?

 

I have taken a great deal of time and effort to show how you continually take a simple verse of Scripture and turn it upside down and backwards to show us that the true and Biblical meaning is the opposite of what it is supposed to be. A shameful practice.

This is a perfect example of what I speaking about:
Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
--Isaiah is simply using a "filthy rag" as an object lesson. He is not going into the details of the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics. He is not explaining the processes of decay and deterioration to the Israelites. He tells the entire nation (infant, toddler, youth, teen, adult, elderly, etc.), the entire nation--they are ALL as filthy rags. It is not a process. He is not telling them they are becoming as filthy rags; they are already there. There is no translation say they are becoming filthy rags. They ARE AS filthy rags. They, ALL OF THEM, are already there. There is no process involved.
This defeats your argument completely.

Most of the time the Bible is not referring to processes but to objects. You read into it more than is there. There is a word for that--eisigesis.

Show me one word in the verse that indicates a progression.
Show me in the Hebrew anywhere that would indicate a progression.
It is not there. You are absolutely wrong.
We ARE as filthy rags. Present tense--all inclusive--the entire nation of Israel including infants.

Those aren't the words of Augustine. Where do you get that from. It is not Augustine 2:3; it is Isaiah 64:6! Wake up Winman!

There is no progression in the verse! You haven't shown any.

 

Let me add some additional information to this to show how wrong it is.

The actual term "filthy rags" in the Hebrew, according to MacArthur and Jamieson, Faucett and Brown, is "menstrous cloth." It is not just any filthy rag; it is a very specific filthy rag.

filthy rags — literally, a “menstruous rag” (Lev_15:33; Lev_20:18; Lam_1:17).

In two other translations we see the same thing:
The Modern King James:
(MKJV) But we are all as the unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as a menstruation cloth. And we all fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Literal Translation
(LITV) But we are all as the unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as a menstruation cloth. And we all fade as a leaf, and like the wind our iniquities take us away.

Anyone can see that there is no process involved here. The Bible teaches that as soon as the cloth touches the woman it is unclean. As soon as a man touches the woman in her period he is unclean.

Leviticus 15:27 And whosoever toucheth those things shall be unclean, and shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
--No process. If anyone would just touch the cloth they were unclean.

This was serious:
Leviticus 15:29 And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
30 And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.
Leviticus 15:31 Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness; that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them.
--If the appropriate sacrifice was not made for the uncleanness afterward, then the penalty was death.

This was not a picture of a rag slowly slowly becoming dirty.
This is a picture of a cloth becoming immediately unclean as soon as it touches the body.
As soon as one is born we are unclean; have a tainted nature; a sin nature. We don't have to wait for it. We are unclean, depraved from birth.

We are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags. They are that way; they don't become that way.

 

Baloney, no woman would put on a soiled piece of cloth but perfectly clean. It would become soiled afterward.

And as I pointed out earlier, all leaves begin tender, green and alive, not faded and dead, they also are ALL originally attached to the tree or plant, only after they wither and die does the wind take them away.

I showed you Psa 14:3 which is what Paul quoted in Romans 3. It says we have "become filthy". That shows we were not originally filthy.

Psa 14:3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

You said you wanted to see a progression? Isa 64:6 says "we all do fade as a leaf". That is a progression!

You simply REFUSE to see the truth that is right before your eyes.

 

Read the Scriptures given.
As soon as it touches the body it is rendered unclean.
No progression.
As soon as one is born, he is born a sinner. No progression.

Jeremiah 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

1. An Ethiopian is born black, and will always be so.
2. A leopard is born with spots and cannot change it.
3. A man is born a sinner and cannot, without the grace of God, change himself.

 

Of course it is a progression, no woman would put on a filthy garment, it would be perfectly clean. It then "becomes filthy" when it is used. You are just being ridiculous.

And no leaf starts out faded and dead, all leaves start out green and alive. The scripture directly says we all do "fade" as a leaf. That is a progression from life to death.

Psa 14:3 says we have "become filthy", which means we were not originally filthy. If you were always filthy you would not say you have "become" filthy.

You just don't want to see it. Your loss.

As for Jeremiah 13:23, your interpretation would have given these Jews the perfect excuse. They could have said, "What do you expect Jeremiah? We were born this way, we have no choice but to sin!". And if your interpretation were correct, that would be absolutely true.

And let me ask you this, who gave the leopard his spots? Who gave the Ethiopian his dark skin? Your interpretation blames God!

No, Jeremiah was simply saying these folks were so stubborn and obstinate in sin that it had almost become their nature, as IF they were born this way. And the word "accustomed" means a learned behavior. For instance, when someone first smokes cigarettes they cough and choke because it is unnatural, but if they continue to smoke they become "accustomed" to it.

Jeremiah was not teaching that we are born sinners.

 

DHK

Yes..you have clearly shown this:thumbsup:

Yes...exceedingly shameful. Especially the continued blasphemy of Jesus person.

.

day after day...post after post:thumbs:

 

Leviticus 15:27 And whosoever toucheth those things shall be unclean, and shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
--Clear enough?
As soon as you touch it, you are unclean. No progression. Immediately a bath is needed and a change of clothing is needed. There is no progression. It is a picture of instant corruption; instant uncleanness.

As I have pointed out from time to time, you stand outside of 2,000 years of orthodox Christianity. It is not my loss, but yours. How many on this board have you convinced of your unorthodoxy? You do realize where you stand don't you? It is not withing the realm of orthodox Christianity.

My interpretation gives no one any excuse.
It is not my interpretation, but the judgement that God through Jeremiah was pronouncing upon the nation of Israel. They were ripe for judgment because of their continual sin. They had not repented. They had not turned. The only way a person can change is by the grace of God. From birth they are born sinners, and that is what Jeremiah told them.
The Ethiopian was black from birth.
The leopard was spotted from birth.
They were evil from birth. It would take a miracle from God to change them.

The "natures" of both were changed under the curse.

All three were born a distinct way. Black, spotted, and evil.

They were accustomed to it because they had been doing it all their lives. They were born that way.

Yes he was. It is very obvious.
Ethiopians are born black; leopards are born spotted, and men are born sinners.
Why complicate things Winman. The only reason you complicate such simple truths is to deny the truths that they teach.