"all have sinned"

[TomVols]

Both sides use qualifiers at times. Neither side should use qualifiers as proof for or against anything.

 

[webdog]

Both sides use qualifiers at times. Neither side should use qualifiers as proof for or against anything.

What do you mean? That is what context is. If I say "all have showered" who are these "all"?

 

[glfredrick]

What do you mean? That is what context is. If I say "all have showered" who are these "all"?

Webdog, you continue to press this question as if it is somehow important. It is not. Why? Because it is not based in any context, which is unlike the biblical questions that you tend to avoid when asked.

"All have showered." Who is "all"? Those who have showered. That's all we can know based on the context of your question. If your question were based in Nebraska, then we could say that "All in Nebraska who have showered have showered." But, of course, you have given no such context, so all we can say is that all who have showered, have showered, which at the end of the day is a tautology -- a self-evident truth.

In the case of Paul in Romans 3:23, however, Paul does indeed give us a context that serves to define the word "pas" in the Greek (all).

That context begins in chapter 1, starting in verse 16, where he notes that the gospel "is the power of God to all who believe" and then Paul sets the context of who it is that can believe, "both Jew and Greek."

In 1:18, Paul makes sure we understand his context clearly, when he explains that his message is not only for those who believe from among Jew and Greek, but that "all unrighteous" persons are included in his understanding. He builds on this theme in the verses that follow, so by the end of chapter 1, Paul has included all Jews, all Greeks (those who are not Jews, otherwise called "Gentiles" in 1st century understanding, c.f., 2:24) and all who are unrighteous (which he goes on to describe in great detail).

In chapter 2, Paul builds on his context, with "all who judge" and he indicates that all do judge. In 2:12, Paul again adds to the context, where he includes the sets of people "under the law" and "not under the law."

Just to recap, so far we have all the people who are righteous, all those who are Jews, all those who are Greeks (Gentiles) all those who are not righteous, all those who judge, and all those who are either under the law or not under the law. A fairly comprehensive list of peoples.

In 2:25ff, Paul adds in those who were circumcised and those who were not. In chapter 3, Paul expands his set to those who argue that they are righteous, and also to those who hold that their works will cause righteousness, as well as recapitulating the early argument from chapter 2, where he included those who judge, having now built a case concerning those who judge.

And, in 3:9, Paul first makes the argument then, that "pas" (all) have sinned. By all, at this phase of his argument, we know that Paul is including ALL the peoples of the world. Those who have heard the gospel, those who have not. Those who are sinners. Those who are Jews or Gentiles, and those who are under the law or not under the law. In other words, ALL humanity.

But, to be sure, Paul builds his argument even more in the verses that follow 3:9. He begins by citing the authority of the OT, when he brings in a verse cited from Psalms 14:1 and 53:1. Paul continues citing the OT as he builds his case, and in 3:19, just to be sure the reader understands the implications of the statements he is making, Paul says, "And the whole world may be held accountable to God...." That means "ALL."

And, finally, when we get to 3:23, when Paul says so simply, "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God..." he has succinctly made his case, by including in the set of which he speaks, "all the people of the world".

Clear enough?

Probably not, for you have great struggles with the Scriptures concerning the fact that indeed "all have sinned."

 

[webdog]

Webdog, you continue to press this question as if it is somehow important. It is not. Why? Because it is not based in any context, which is unlike the biblical questions that you tend to avoid when asked.

"All have showered." Who is "all"? Those who have showered. That's all we can know based on the context of your question. If your question were based in Nebraska, then we could say that "All in Nebraska who have showered have showered." But, of course, you have given no such context, so all we can say is that all who have showered, have showered, which at the end of the day is a tautology -- a self-evident truth.

In the case of Paul in Romans 3:23, however, Paul does indeed give us a context that serves to define the word "pas" in the Greek (all).

That context begins in chapter 1, starting in verse 16, where he notes that the gospel "is the power of God to all who believe" and then Paul sets the context of who it is that can believe, "both Jew and Greek."

..and you honestly this this context helps your case? If anything, the fact that the "all" are made up of both Jew and Greek does not take away from the qualifier "have sinned". If I say "all have showered and are now clean" you have enough information to know that the "all" are the ones who have showered and are now clean. It makes no difference where they are from or what race they are made up of. Have showered qualifies who the all is and the action taken...not condition as you are trying to make it fit.

Probably not, for you have great struggles with the Scriptures concerning the fact that indeed "all have sinned."

Actually I don't. I believe all who can sin "have sinned"...PAST tense. You somehow twist this statement explaining a past action to include those yet born which defies any logic at all. Actually as much logic as baptizing a baby.

 

[glfredrick]

..and you honestly this this context helps your case? If anything, the fact that the "all" are made up of both Jew and Greek does not take away from the qualifier "have sinned". If I say "all have showered and are now clean" you have enough information to know that the "all" are the ones who have showered and are now clean. It makes no difference where they are from or what race they are made up of. Have showered qualifies who the all is and the action taken...not condition as you are trying to make it fit.
Actually I don't. I believe all who can sin "have sinned"...PAST tense. You somehow twist this statement explaining a past action to include those yet born which defies any logic at all. Actually as much logic as baptizing a baby.

It is as I thought. You have a problem with a very clear teaching of Scripture.

Note that when Paul included "Jew and Greek" he included EVERYONE in the human race, for those were the only two qualifiers in his context. One was either a Jew or something else, which is the sum total of all humans.

And, you fail John's test:

1John 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

As I understand it, you suggest that some not yet born may be born in such as way as to totally avoid any sin whatsoever. Or, conversely, that some may have been born who did not sin at all. You, sir, are calling God a liar for it was He, not I, who caused it to be said that all have sinned in His Word.

Perhaps it is you who have never sinned? Just wondering, for all the rest of us have...

 

[webdog]

It is as I thought. You have a problem with a very clear teaching of Scripture.

Actually I don't, it is apparent you have a problem with "you were dead in your trespasses and sins"

Note that when Paul included "Jew and Greek" he included EVERYONE in the human race, for those were the only two qualifiers in his context. One was either a Jew or something else, which is the sum total of all humans.

You are missing it. EVERYONE with the ability and capacity to sin WILL SIN. All that can HAVE SINNED as Paul states.

1John 1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

I haven't failed anything, as I have never stated that. Complete strawman.

As I understand it, you suggest that some not yet born may be born in such as way as to totally avoid any sin whatsoever. Or, conversely, that some may have been born who did not sin at all. You, sir, are calling God a liar for it was He, not I, who caused it to be said that all have sinned in His Word.

As in most cases, you are not doing a good job understanding. I have maintained that everyone with the capacity so sin will sin, so please stop misrepresenting me. The only one who could ever live free of sin is Christ. Would you like to debate what I actually say one day instead of what you want me to say?

The human nature is completely tainted by sin. That is not he same thing as being a sinner which is DEFINDED as "one who sins". Nobody has told me yet what sin was committed in the womb.

I suppose you refer to an infant as a runner, jumper and laugher since it is in their nature to do all of these things one day?

 

[glfredrick]

EVERY commentary that I search is in agreement. All means ALL, past, present, future. The term is not limited in time or place, but is UNIVERSAL.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Clarke's Commentary on the Bible
For all have sinned : - And consequently are equally helpless and guilty; and, as God is no respecter of persons, all human creatures being equally his offspring, and there being no reason why one should be preferred before another, therefore his endless mercy has embraced All.

And come short of the glory of God - και υστερουνται της δοξης του θεου These words have been variously translated. Failed of attaining the glory of God: Have not been able to bring glory to God: Stand in need of the glory, that is, the mercy of God. The simple meaning seems to be this: that all have sinned, and none can enjoy God's glory but they that are holy; consequently both Jews and Gentiles have failed in their endeavors to attain it, as, by the works of any law, no human being can be justified.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
For all have sinned,.... This is the general character of all mankind; all have sinned in Adam, are guilty by his sin, polluted with it, and condemned for it; all are sinners in themselves, and by their own actual transgressions; this is the case of the whole world, and of all the men in it; not only of the Gentiles, but of the Jews, and the more righteous among them: hence there is no difference in the state and condition of men by nature; nor is there any reason from and in themselves, why God saves one and not another; nor any room to despair of the grace and righteousness of Christ, on account of persons being, in their own view, the worst of sinners:

and hence it is, that they are all come short of the glory of God; either of glorifying of God; man was made for this purpose, and was capable of it, though now through sin incapable; and it is only by the grace of God that he is enabled to do it: or of glorying: before him; sin has made him infamous, and is his shame; by it he has forfeited all external favours, and has nothing of his own to glory in; his moral righteousness is no foundation for boasting, especially before God: or of having glory from God; the most pure and perfect creature does not of itself deserve any glory and praise from God; good men, in a way of grace, will have praise of God; but sinners can never expect any on their own account: or of the glorious grace of God, as sanctifying and pardoning grace, and particularly the grace of a justifying righteousness; man has no righteousness, nor can he work out one; nor will his own avail, he wants a better than that: or of eternal glory; which may be called the glory of God, because it is of his preparing, what he calls persons to by his grace, and which of his own free grace he bestows upon them... <snip>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vincent's Word Studies
Have sinned (ἥμαρτον)

Aorist tense: sinned, looking back to a thing definitely past - the historic occurrence of sin.

And come short (ὑστεροῦνται)

Rev., fall short: The present tense. The A.V. leaves it uncertain whether the present or the perfect have come is intended. They sinned, and therefore they are lacking. See on Luke 15:14. The word is not merely equivalent to they are wanting in, but implies want under the aspect of shortcoming.

The glory of God (τῆς δόξης τοῦ Θεοῦ)

Interpretations vary greatly. The glory of personal righteousness; that righteousness which God judges to be glory; the image of God in man; the glorying or boasting of righteousness before God; the approbation of God; the state of future glory.

The dominant meanings of δόξα in classical Greek are notion, opinion, conjecture, repute. See on Revelation 1:6. In biblical usage: 1. Recognition, honor, Philippians 1:11; 1 Peter 1:7. It is joined with τιμή honor, 1 Timothy 1:17; Hebrews 2:7, Hebrews 2:9; 2 Peter 1:17. Opposed to ἀτιμὶα dishonor, 1 Corinthians 11:14, 1 Corinthians 11:15; 1 Corinthians 15:43; 2 Corinthians 6:8. With ζητέω to seek, 1 Thessalonians 2:6; John 5:44; John 7:18. With λαμβάνω to receive, John 5:41, John 5:44. With δίδωμι to give, Luke 17:18; John 9:24. In the ascriptive phrase glory be to, Luke 2:14, and ascriptions in the Epistles. Compare Luke 14:10. 2. The glorious appearance which attracts the eye, Matthew 4:8; Luke 4:6; Luke 12:27. Hence parallel with εἰκών image; μορφή form; ὁμοίωμα likeness; εἶδος appearance, figure, Romans 1:23; Psalm 17:15; Numbers 12:8.

The glory of God is used of the aggregate of the divine attributes and coincides with His self-revelation, Exodus 33:22; compare πρόσωπον face, Exodus 33:23. Hence the idea is prominent in the redemptive revelation (Isaiah 60:3; Romans 6:4; Romans 5:2). It expresses the form in which God reveals Himself in the economy of salvation (Romans 9:23; 1 Timothy 1:11; Ephesians 1:12). It is the means by which the redemptive work is carried on; for instance, in calling, 2 Peter 1:3; in raising up Christ and believers with Him to newness of life, Romans 6:4; in imparting strength to believers, Ephesians 3:16; Colossians 1:11; as the goal of Christian hope, Romans 5:2; Romans 8:18, Romans 8:21; Titus 2:13. It appears prominently in the work of Christ - the outraying of the Father's glory (Hebrews 1:3), especially in John. See John 1:14; John 2:11, etc.

The sense of the phrase here is: they are coming short of the honor or approbation which God bestows. The point under discussion is the want of righteousness. Unbelievers, or mere legalists, do not approve themselves before God by the righteousness which is of the law. They come short of the approbation which is extended only to those who are justified by faith.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wesley's Notes
3:23 For all have sinned - In Adam, and in their own persons; by a sinful nature, sinful tempers, and sinful actions. And are fallen short of the glory of God - The supreme end of man; short of his image on earth, and the enjoyment of him in heaven.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Scofield Reference Notes
[2] sinned

Sin, Summary: The literal meanings of the Heb. and Gr. words variously rendered "sin," "sinner," etc., disclose the true nature of sin in its manifold manifestations. Sin is transgression, an overstepping of the law, the divine boundary between good and evil Ps 51:1 Lk 15:29, iniquity, an act inherently wrong, whether expressly forbidden or not; error, a departure from right Ps 51:9 Rom 3:23, missing the mark, a failure to meet the divine standard; trespass, the intrusion of self-will into the sphere of divine authority Eph 2:1, lawlessness, or spiritual anarchy 1Tim 1:9, unbelief, or an insult to the divine veracity Jn 16:9.

Sin originated with Satan Isa 14:12-14, entered the world through Adam Rom 5:12, was, and is, universal, Christ alone excepted Rom 3:23 1Pet 2:22, incurs the penalties of spiritual and physical death Gen 2:17 3:19 Ezek 18:4,20 Rom 6:23 and has no remedy but in the sacrificial death of Christ Heb 9:26 Acts 4:12 availed of by faith Acts 13:38,39. Sin may be summarized as threefold: An act, the violation of, or want of obedience to the revealed will of God; a state, absence of righteousness; a nature, enmity toward God.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
23. for all have sinned-Though men differ greatly in the nature and extent of their sinfulness, there is absolutely no difference between the best and the worst of men, in the fact that "all have sinned," and so underlie the wrath of God.

and come short of the glory-or "praise"

of God-that is, "have failed to earn His approbation" (compare Joh 12:43, Greek). So the best interpreters.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
3:21-26 Must guilty man remain under wrath? Is the wound for ever incurable? No; blessed be God, there is another way laid open for us. This is the righteousness of God; righteousness of his ordaining, and providing, and accepting. It is by that faith which has Jesus Christ for its object; an anointed Saviour, so Jesus Christ signifies. Justifying faith respects Christ as a Saviour, in all his three anointed offices, as Prophet, Priest, and King; trusting in him, accepting him, and cleaving to him: in all these, Jews and Gentiles are alike welcome to God through Christ. There is no difference, his righteousness is upon all that believe; not only offered to them, but put upon them as a crown, as a robe. It is free grace, mere mercy; there is nothing in us to deserve such favours. It comes freely unto us, but Christ bought it, and paid the price. And faith has special regard to the blood of Christ, as that which made the atonement. God, in all this, declares his righteousness. It is plain that he hates sin, when nothing less than the blood of Christ would satisfy for it. And it would not agree with his justice to demand the debt, when the Surety has paid it, and he has accepted that payment in full satisfaction.

 

[glfredrick]

I will agree with you on one point. Christ was the one solely without sin.

 

[webdog]

EVERY commentary that I search is in agreement. All means ALL, past, present, future. The term is not limited in time or place, but is UNIVERSAL.

J, F & B said nothing of past present and future, neither did Matthew Henry...or Clarke, not to mention Vincent rightly attributes it to a past event...then attributes it to the "historic occurrence of sin" (didn't mention Adam's sin, btw).

Nice try, though. Do you happen to have commentaries pre-Augustine?

 

[webdog]

I will agree with you on one point. Christ was the one solely without sin.

I suppose you refer to an infant as a runner, jumper and laugher since it is in their nature to do all of these things one day?

 

[glfredrick]

I suppose you refer to an infant as a runner, jumper and laugher since it is in their nature to do all of these things one day?

You continue to call God a liar...

 

[webdog]

You continue to call God a liar...

Surely not hard to answer a simple question, is it? You continue to falsely accuse. God calls sinners those who sin, who transgress His laws...not those who are conceived. If anything your view diminishes responsibility and accountability.

YOU were dead in YOUR trespasses and sins in which YOU used to walk.

 

[GBC Pastor]

Are you honestly saying that the "all" of Romans 3:23 is NOT everyone?

Luke, you have given me a new definition for irony! A Calvinist defending the universal nature of the word "all" in Scripture. I've been sick for the last three days, that gave me a much needed laugh! :laugh:

Thanks!

 

[R. Lawson]

Luke, you have given me a new definition for irony! A Calvinist defending the universal nature of the word "all" in Scripture. I've been sick for the last three days, that gave me a much needed laugh! :laugh:

Thanks!

:laugh: There's one for the blooper reel!

:1_grouphug:

 

[Rippon]

Luke, you have given me a new definition for irony! A Calvinist defending the universal nature of the word "all" in Scripture. I've been sick for the last three days, that gave me a much needed laugh! :laugh:

Thanks!

Name one Calvinist-- just one Calvinist, who denies that Romans 3:23 applies to everyone,past,present and future head-for-head. You can't do it. So there is no irony. There is no blooper. There is nothing funny about it at all.

It just shows how uninformed many non-Cals are when it comes to Calvinism --once again!

There are certainly universal passages in the Scripture.The verse in question is the primary one.

 

[Luke2427]

Surely not hard to answer a simple question, is it? You continue to falsely accuse. God calls sinners those who sin, who transgress His laws...not those who are conceived. If anything your view diminishes responsibility and accountability.

YOU were dead in YOUR trespasses and sins in which YOU used to walk.

No. God said that we come forth from the womb telling lies. God said that in sin did our mothers conceive us.

That is what God said.

God said that ALL are sinners in need of a Savior. That is what God said.

What God says and what you say are diametrically opposed one to the other.

It is NOT a babies nature to run and jump. That is kind of silly, I think.


It is all human beings nature to sin.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke, you have given me a new definition for irony! A Calvinist defending the universal nature of the word "all" in Scripture. I've been sick for the last three days, that gave me a much needed laugh! :laugh:

Thanks!

nevermind...

 

[Luke2427]

EVERY commentary that I search is in agreement. All means ALL, past, present, future. The term is not limited in time or place, but is UNIVERSAL.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You don't understand. Webdog does not care if every Christian in the history of the world disagrees with him and points out how ludicrous his interpretations are. He does not care at all about Orthodoxy. He does not care about Systematic Theology.

All the work that Christians have done for the past 2,000 years is meaningless to him.

He is smarter than Augustine, Wycliff, Huss, Luther, Aquinas, Wesley, Calvin, Jacobus Arminius, Edwards, and the whole of Christianity put together. Who cares about the Council of Nicaea!!?? We have WEBDOG!! Who needs the stupid Council of Chalcedon!!?? WEBDOG is here!

It does not MATTER if the entire Orthodox faith opposes his viewpoints. What is that to him?

He is WEBDOG!!


He is such a man of the Scriptures that he needs no puny theologians or orthodox faith to hold him accountable! He believes the BIBLE whereas the rest of the Orthodox Faith and millions of Christians over thousands of years do not.

Thank heavens he has come to educate us all, all two thousand years of Christian history of us, in the BIBLE!

 

[Iconoclast]

Three random thoughts:

(1) Anyone know if Noah Webster was a calvinist?

My dictionary has 15 different definitions for "all". When "all" is used, the context modifies or explains it. Even simple reading shows that "everyone without exception" is not the most common meaning of the word.

All the world went to be taxed. Not everyone without exception of course.

All Jerusalem went to be baptized by John. Not everyone without exception of course. Jesus later confronts pharisees et al and said they did NOT go.

And a hundred more.

(2) Read John 3:16 in God's Word (NOT in man-made translations). The word "whosoever" is not found. It is simply the participle "the believing ones" will not perish. Sadly, poor translations can play with our minds and cause unlearned to make up doctrines

(3) When an important truth like the universality of man's depravity and complete inability to do anything right in the sight of God is presented, God uses the word "none". As in "none" righteous. (Rom 3).

To be sure that the context helps clarify that this truly does mean every single human being, God carefully adds TWICE (to be sure slow learners and pelagians would catch it) "no, not even one!!"

And a hundred more.

Webster in early life was something of a freethinker, but in 1808 he became a convert to Calvinistic orthodoxy, and thereafter became a devout Congregationalist who preached the need to Christianize the nation.[18] Webster grew increasingly authoritarian and elitist, fighting against the prevailing grain of Jacksonian Democracy. Webster viewed language as a tool to control unruly thoughts. His American Dictionary emphasized the virtues of social control over human passions and individualism, submission to authority, and fear of God; they were necessary for the maintenance of the American social order. As he grew older, Webster's attitudes changed from those of an optimistic revolutionary in the 1780s to those of a pessimistic critic of man and society by the 1820s.[19]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_Webster

 

[glfredrick]

Name one Calvinist-- just one Calvinist, who denies that Romans 3:23 applies to everyone,past,present and future head-for-head. You can't do it. So there is no irony. There is no blooper. There is nothing funny about it at all.

It just shows how uninformed many non-Cals are when it comes to Calvinism --once again!

There are certainly universal passages in the Scripture.The verse in question is the primary one.

I agree... As do both Calvinists and scripturally honest Arminians. The passage in Romans is universal -- all people, all times, all places, all ages, yes, from the womb.

The only one I've found (in a search through over 20 commentaries) that disagrees with Rom 3:23 as a universal statement of the condition of humans is webdob, which likely means that webdog is the one who is incorrect in his interpretation.

Paul carefully builds his argument through the first 3 chapters of Romans to conclude with that statement. He understood just how radical it was when he wrote, hence his long drawn out argument to that point. He anticipated webdog's response (not personally, but the same response by others) and made his argument iron-clad. All in this particular case means ALL.

Webdog, can God not see all and speak to that truth in a universal way, or must God be a God of the open theist, who cannot see something until after it has happened? You are arguing for open theism here. I (and Paul) are arguing for a God who knows all and who can speak authoritatively on any given subject, past, present, and future.