Born in Sins

[Jerry Shugart]

Rom. 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

I know the verses well and I even alluded to them. I also said that Paul was obviously speaking in a figurative sense.

But you continue to insist that "sin" is a physical substance that can actually dwell in the human body!

I simply quoted Paul's words and he says sin indwells the flesh:

Rom. 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

You say it does not, Paul says it does! I will take Paul's view!

I cannot believe that in the 21th century we still have people who believe as people believed during the Dark Ages!

When Paul spoke of the flesh in the sense of being "sinful," he was never speaking of the flesh in its literal sense (see Romans 7:5, 8:8 and 8:9).

According to Paul the Christian is no longer "in the flesh." Who would dare insist that the word "flesh" is being used literally except for you?

If we are no longer in the flesh then that would mean that we are no longer in the body.

Despite all this you continue to insist that sin" is actually a physical substance which can dwell in a person's body!

His "brothers" had the HUMAN NATURE which existed both before and after the fall!

Here we can see what the Calvinists teach of "human nature" after the fall:

"We do not see how the universal corruption of mankind can be accounted for, without admitting that they are involved in the guilt of his first transgression. It must be some sin which God punishes with the deprivation of original righteousness; and that can be no other than the first sin of Adam" (Robert Shaw, The Reformed Faith: An Exposition of the Westminster Confession of Faith).

According to this the Calvinists teach that the "human nature" that has existed since the fall is a nature that is deprived of "original rightdeousness."

The Scriptures say that Christ was made like His "brothers" in every way so if you are right then we must believe that Christ was made with a nature deprived of original righteousness.

That is as absurd as is your idea that God punishes others for Adam's sin and as a result infants come into the world deprived of original righteousness.

 

[DHK]

Here is the verse again:

"For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well" (Ps.139:13-14).

Being created by God involves much more that our "physical" body. The following verse speaks of much more than that:

"

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

"With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God's likeness" (Jas.3:9).

When James says that we have been made in God's likeness he is not saying that God is a physical being and that we are like him in that manner.

We can also see that it is said that the Lord Jesus is also "the image of God":

"In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them" (2 Cor.4:4).

We can also see that The Lord Jesus was "fully human in every way":

"For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for* the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17).

It is beyond me how anyone can say that a person comes out of the womb dead spiritually since we are made in the image of God. It is beyond me how anyone can say that we are born with a corrupted nature since we are made in the image or likeness of God.

It is beyond me how anyone can say that we are born dead spirtually and with a corrupted nature since it is said that Christ was made like us in every way.

Again, Paul speaks of being "alive" until he broke a commandment and he says that the commandment slew him:

"For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me" (Ro.7:9-11).

Surely Paul was not speaking of "physical" life and death since he was alive physically when he wrote those words. Therefore he was speaking about being alive spiritually before he broke the law. That means that he was not born dead spiritually because one has to be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

Why don't you quote from the Book of Hezekiah as well. There are some wonderful verses there to support your presuppositions.

Here are the facts. The discussion centered around Psalm 139:13,14.
None of the verses quoted have nothing to do with that verse.
The interpretation, the meaning of that small passage of Scripture must be derived from the Psalm itself, not from random pick and choose verses throughout the rest of the Bible. Your willy-nilly method of interpretation does nothing to add to the interpretation of Psalm 139:13,14. Please read the Book of Hezekiah first.

 

[The Biblicist]

I know the verses well and I even alluded to them. I also said that Paul was obviously speaking in a figurative sense.

Do you also say the moon is made of cheese and little green men live on mars?

In this context the term "flesh" is synonymous with "body" and "members" are those also figurative expressions and so figurative of what?

Is "sin" a figurative expression? If so, of what?

Is "dwelleth in me" a figurative expression? If so, of what?

But you continue to insist that "sin" is a physical substance that can actually dwell in the human body!

Please quote anywhere at anytime I have ever used the words "physical substance" to define sin? If you cannot find it then retract this erroneous charge!

Is death literally and actually working corruption in your body OR is "death" merely figurative?

I cannot believe that in the 21th century we still have people who believe as people believed during the Dark Ages!

Is your only resource ridicule when you have no substance to say???

The principle of sin resides in the physical body, members, flesh and the proof is corruption of the physical body, members, and flesh. Sin is not a physical substance but a principle/law which is at work IN the phyiscal material nature of man and ultimate death will prove it!

The Scriptures say that Christ was made like His "brothers" in every way so if you are right then we must believe that Christ was made with a nature deprived of original righteousness.

I break it down in baby step for you but you either don't understand what I said, OR you do and are intentionally perverting it hoping others won't understand what I said! Which is it?

To be made human in nature is to be made like his "brothers" - period! However, to be made like Adam, coming straight from God's creative hands, and thus like Christ being conceived directly by God through virigin birth is not to be made like his "brothers" but nevertheless still made like his "brothers" in regard to human nature!

Do you understand the difference? The difference is not human nature whether it comes from parents or directly from God but it does make a difference between the indwelling principle of sin.

Got it?

Hence, he was made like unto his "brothers" in every way that is required to be human in nature! However, sin or the absence of sin is not required to be human or non-human in nature!

Got it?

However, virgin birth "made" Christ like unto prefallen Adam different from his "brothers" in several ways:

1. No human father
2. No sin in prefallen Adam

You cannot deny that Christ was made after the pattern of pre-fallen Adam in regard to sin becuase he is likened to pre-fallen Adam and and called the "Second Adam" (Rom. 5:14; 1 Cor. 15:44-48) and contrasted with the Post-fallen Adam (Rom. 5:15-16; 1 Cor. 15:22).

Again, your theory depends totally upon texts that do not clearly and explicitly deal with birth and the moral condition of man at birth but INFERENCES and necessarily must EXPLAIN AWAY texts that clearly and explicitly deal with birth and the unclean/sinful state of man at birth.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Jerry: The Scriptures say that Christ was made like His "brothers" in every way so if you are right then we must believe that Christ was made with a nature deprived of original righteousness.

That is as absurd as is your idea that God punishes others for Adam's sin and as a result infants come into the world deprived of original righteousness.

HP: Yet another excellent manner to teach truth. Simply apply ones notions to a universally accepted true statements concerning Christ to see if in fact it will float.

Well........ it sunk. :thumbsup:

 

[DHK]

HP: Yet another excellent manner to teach truth. Simply apply ones notions to a universally accepted true statements concerning Christ to see if in fact it will float.

Well........ it sunk. :thumbsup:

In every way??
Does that mean that we are all deity as well?
Does that mean that we are all sinless as well?
Does that mean we are all born of virgins as well?
--This last one is the most applicable.
If he were made like us in every way we would all be born of virgins.

Are we all Jews?
Are we all descended from David?
Can we do the miracles that Christ could do? Or, to put it another way, if he was like us in every way, why could he do the miracles that we cannot do?

"In every way?"
The statement is not as absolute as you make it out to be.
He was born of a virgin, that he would not be born with a sin nature. That is the primary reason that he had to be born of a virgin--to escape the curse that was put on Adam.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Please quote anywhere at anytime I have ever used the words "physical substance" to define sin? If you cannot find it then retract this erroneous charge!

could you be honest for a change and cease from your false accusations. I correctly said that the expression "sin dwelleth in me can only be understood in a figurative sense. but since you thought it should be understood literally you said:

Is "sin" a figurative expression? If so, of what?

Is "dwelleth in me" a figurative expression? If so, of what?

Now you see that the expression "sin dwelleth in me" actually is speaking about a "principle" dwelling in a person:

The principle of sin resides in the physical body, members, flesh and the proof is corruption of the physical body, members, and flesh. Sin is not a physical substance but a principle/law which is at work IN the phyiscal material nature of man and ultimate death will prove it!

Obviously Paul was not "literally" saying that sin dwells in anyone. Despite that you argued that those verses are not being used figuratively!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: He was born of a virgin, that he would not be born with a sin nature. That is the primary reason that he had to be born of a virgin--to escape the curse that was put on Adam.

HP: We both agree that Christ was born of a virgin, but a seed was implanted of the seed of Abraham. Scripture also tells us clearly that Christ, from a physical perspective, was indeed a descendant of his father Joseph. Scripture simply does not tell us why He was birthed as he was, or that he had to be because of original sin.

I fully understand why you have to say that. To be fair, you have to admit that is simply not stated or implied by Scripture, but is a philosophical position driven by the presupposition of original sin.

If you disagree, show us from the Word of God where it tells us 'why' He was born of a virgin, and 'why' a human seed could not have been implanted by the Holy Spirit.

 

[DHK]

HP: We both agree that Christ was born of a virgin, but a seed was implanted of the seed of Abraham.

It sounds like you have a misunderstanding of Scripture or a denial of Scripture, I am not sure which one. Go back right to Gen.3:15, the very first Messianic promise. Christ would come of the "seed of the woman." This is significant because it is not the woman that has the seed, it is the man. The seed was not provided by Joseph, Abraham, or any other man, but rather by the Holy Spirit of God.
The Scriptures tell us plainly that Mary was "conceived of the Holy Spirit." Go to church at this time of year and maybe you will hear a sermon on that subject.
Christ was not conceived by a man, but by the Holy Spirit.

Scripture also tells us clearly that Christ, from a physical perspective, was indeed a descendant of his father Joseph.

Then quote the Scripture.

Scripture simply does not tell us why He was birthed as he was, or that he had to be because of original sin.

It is the only way that he could escape the curse of Adam.
It is also the only way that he could escape the curse of Coniah.

I fully understand why you have to say that. To be fair, you have to admit that is simply not stated or implied by Scripture, but is a philosophical position driven by the presupposition of original sin.

I have Scripture; you do not.

If you disagree, show us from the Word of God where it tells us 'why' He was born of a virgin, and 'why' a human seed could not have been implanted by the Holy Spirit.

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. (Genesis 3:15)
--The seed of the woman is Christ. This prophecy is given in the midst of the curse put on Adam and the rest of creation. The very context denotes that the virgin birth, here referred to, was necessary to avoid the sin nature being passed on.

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. (Isaiah 7:14)
--An absolute necessity.

But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, (Galatians 4:4)
--Made, not born. A reference to the virgin birth.

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. (Matthew 1:20)
--These words to Joseph indicate that he had nothing to do with this. Christ was conceived by the Holy Spirit, as it clearly states here.

Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 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. (Matthew 1:22-23)
--The fulfillment of prophecy; but it was more than that.

And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS. (Matthew 1:25)
--Jesus means Saviour, or "Jehovah the Saviour"
The Saviour could only be a Saviour if he himself was sinless. He could only be sinless if he had no sin nature. He could only be without a sin nature if he were born of a virgin, as the record states.

And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. 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: (Luke 1:31-32)
--born of a virgin, not of a man. Why? To escape the stain of sin.

Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. (Luke 1:34-35)
--No man was involved because "that which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God."
Is it not evident that God can have no sin? If there were a man involved there would be the taint of sin; the sin nature.

And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour. (Luke 1:47)
--In this one short verse Mary admits her sinfulness and her need of a Saviour. Her life had been tainted by sin simply by her birth (born of a man), no matter how well she may have lived it. But not so with Christ. He not only lived a sinless life. He was born without a sin nature. Never did Christ have to refer to a sin nature, or even infer that he was sinful, like all that went before him.

Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? is he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not? O earth, earth, earth, hear the word of the LORD. Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man that shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah. (Jeremiah 22:28-30)

Coniah was a descendant of David. But in his transgression he was so cursed that neither he nor any of his descendants would ever sit on the throne of David. Joseph happened to be one of the descendants of Coniah. For this reason also Joseph was unable to be the father of Jesus, and Christ was virgin born. Joseph was under a double curse: the curse of Adam and the curse of Coniah.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK, Are you trying to purposely derail this thread?:laugh:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

In every way??

Does that mean we are all born of virgins as well?
--This last one is the most applicable.
If he were made like us in every way we would all be born of virgins.

You miss understand what the following verse is saying:

"For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for* the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17).

The Greek word translated "to be made like" has nothing to do with how anyone is conceived. Instead, it means:

"to make like: 'to be' or or 'to become like' to one...Heb. ii. 17" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

So the argument in regard to the virgin birth is bogus.

Since the Lord Jesus became like us in every way then it is obvious that we are not born spiritually dead and with a corrupt nature.

 

[The Biblicist]

could you be honest for a change and cease from your false accusations. I correctly said that the expression "sin dwelleth in me can only be understood in a figurative sense.

Here is what you said,

"But you continue to insist that "sin" is a physical substance that can actually dwell in the human body!" - JS (Post #81)


Let the reader decide who is honest and dishonest in this exchange!

Now you see that the expression "sin dwelleth in me" actually is speaking about a "principle" dwelling in a person:

Contrary to your charge I never said sin was a "matieral substance" dwelling in the flesh! If it is not materal then it is non-material. Paul called it the "law" or principle of sin! Sin is a "law" or principle" in that it is the law of REBELLION against God and thus a SPIRITUAL principle/law indwelling men from birth.

 

[Winman]

You miss understand what the following verse is saying:

"For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for* the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17).

The Greek word translated "to be made like" has nothing to do with how anyone is conceived. Instead, it means:

"to make like: 'to be' or or 'to become like' to one...Heb. ii. 17" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

So the argument in regard to the virgin birth is bogus.

Since the Lord Jesus became like us in every way then it is obvious that we are not born spiritually dead and with a corrupt nature.

I agree, Jesus came in the "flesh". In fact, to deny this is the spirit of antichrist (1 Jn 4:1-3). Jesus could be tempted by the lusts and desires of his flesh just as we are, but he never obeyed these lusts when it would have caused him to sin. The scriptures say he had the same "nature" as the seed of Abraham, and was made like unto his brethren (the Jews) in "all things". The scriptures say he "suffered" being tempted. The scriptures say Jesus was "tempted in ALL POINTS like as we are, yet without sin" (Heb 2:16-18, Heb 4:15).

Jesus had the same exact nature we have. If we have a sin nature, then so did Jesus. I REFUSE to believe this. We are born "flesh", and Jesus came in the "flesh".

Having a nature or propensity to sin does not make one a sinner, just as having the ability to rob a bank does not make you a bank robber. You must actually rob a bank to be a bank robber, and you must actually commit a sin to be a sinner.

Jesus inherited his flesh and the ability to be tempted from Mary, God the Father is a spirit, and cannot be tempted.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Here is what you said,

"But you continue to insist that "sin" is a physical substance that can actually dwell in the human body!" - JS (Post #81)

Let the reader decide who is honest and dishonest in this exchange!

I said that before I read your post where you backtracked and admitted that the words "sin dwelleth in me" cannot be taken literally.

Contrary to your charge I never said sin was a "matieral substance" dwelling in the flesh!

You were arguing that the phrase is not to be understood in a "figurative" sense so you obviously believed the phrase should be interpreted "literally."

Sin is a "law" or principle" in that it is the law of REBELLION against God and thus a SPIRITUAL principle/law indwelling men from birth.

You might be right if we understand that the word "sin" in the phrase "sin dwelleth in me" is not being used in a literal sense but instead figurative.

Or perhaps you can quote a Greek expert who gives the meaning of "sin" as "a law or principle."

Paul was obviouly using the word "sin" in a figurative sense but earlier you did not agree, saying:

Is "sin" a figurative expression? If so, of what?

Is "dwelleth in me" a figurative expression? If so, of what?

 

[The Biblicist]

I said that before I read your post where you backtracked and admitted that the words "sin dwelleth in me" cannot be taken literally.

I never backtracked! I simply denied it was MATERIAL SUBSTANCE. The principle/law of indwelling sin is a SPIRITUAL substance as literal as your body is a material subtance!

You were arguing that the phrase is not to be understood in a "figurative" sense so you obviously believed the phrase should be interpreted "literally."

Do you realize that just because something is not MATERIAL in substance does not mean it cannot be SPIRITUAL in subtance neither being figurative??????

[/QUOTE

 

[DHK]

You miss understand what the following verse is saying:

"For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for* the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17).

The Greek word translated "to be made like" has nothing to do with how anyone is conceived. Instead, it means:

"to make like: 'to be' or or 'to become like' to one...Heb. ii. 17" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

So the argument in regard to the virgin birth is bogus.

Since the Lord Jesus became like us in every way then it is obvious that we are not born spiritually dead and with a corrupt nature.

No it doesn't.
Jesus Christ became a man, as we are men. That is all that it means.
It means that he suffered, hungered, thirsted, etc., just like we did.
He was tempted in all things such as we have been, so that he would qualify as our great high priest. Read Hebrews 4.
It has nothing to do with the sin nature of man. Christ could not have a sin nature of man or of Adam. Adam was the first Adam; Christ was the Second Adam. The first Adam brought sin into the world; The Second Adam brought redemption into the world.

 

[DHK]

DHK, Are you trying to purposely derail this thread?:laugh:

I am answering your questions with Scripture. But I see you have no Scripture to back your philosophy.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK, what specific part of my philosophy are you alluding to?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK, lets make a deal. I will give you Gen 3:15 if you will guarantee me Gen 3:16. :smilewinkgrin:

 

[DHK]

DHK, lets make a deal. I will give you Gen 3:15 if you will guarantee me Gen 3:16. :smilewinkgrin:

Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. (Genesis 3:16)
Guarantee it for who? You? Take it to the men's private forum.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

No it doesn't.
Jesus Christ became a man, as we are men. That is all that it means.

That is not what it means because the verse says that he was made like us in every way.

It has nothing to do with the sin nature of man.

A man does not become a 'sinner" until he sins so any sin nature of man does not even come into existence until he sins.

Christ could not have a sin nature of man or of Adam. Adam was the first Adam; Christ was the Second Adam. The first Adam brought sin into the world; The Second Adam brought redemption into the world.

For a person to be identified with Christ he first must believe. In order for a person to be identified with Adam he must also do something, and that thing is to sin.

All you do is to prove that you will not believe what is said here:

"For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for* the sins of the people" (Heb.2:17).

To you the Lord Jesus was made like His brothers in only "some" ways!