By One Man's Disobedience Many Were Made Sinners

[The Biblicist]

Yes, they all believed man is born with a sinful nature.

Yet, they all believed Jesus was born with the nature of the seed of Abraham, because that is what the scriptures say.

Then they all believed a contradiction.

In my view, there is no contradiction. Men are not born sinful, but become sinful when they actually sin. Jesus being born with the same nature was not sinful, and never became sinful because he never actually sinned.

Notice that your view admits to the very essence of our disagreement. Your view admits that human nature and the sin nature are distinct. Note you have man born without sin and thus a human nature without sin and thus not essential to the human nature. However, you believe the human nature can be later CONTAMINATED by sin and thus the sin nature is an ADDITIVE or a CORRUPTION of the human nature that comes later with willful sin and so something not essential to human nature.

That is precisely, what the above commentators and we are teaching. All human beings are born with a human nature contaminated by sin due to the fall while Christ was born with an uncontaminated human nature.

Hence, the issue of Hebrews 2:17 is not over the CONTAMINATION but over the human nature. Christ was born fully HUMAN in nature and that does not require or include the CONTAMINATIVE or ADDITIVE of the sinful nature.

Isaiah chapter one characterizes the sin nature as a PARASITE to the human nature rather than essential to human nature. It characterizes it as a CONTAMINATIVE to the human nature.

Why not be consistent with your own view and admit that the contaminative sin nature is an ADDITIVE rather than a characteristic of human nature? Thus why not admit that Christ can be fully human in nature without a sinful nature while fallen man can be fully human in nature with the addition of a sinful nature without contradicting Hebrew 2:17???

Your problem is that you fail to understand or recognize that the "death" which passed upon all men in Romans 2:17 is "spiritual" death - the contaminative or additive to human nature and it passed through the reproductive cycle through the father and the proof is that infants phyiscally die because they are condemned to physical death through partaking in the spiritual death which always leads to physical death.


Isaiah chapter one proves the sin nature is an ADDITIVE to the human nature rather than

 

[glfredrick]

Winman would be shocked to know that he is arguing for the same doctrinal system held by Catholics since the Council of Trent...

 

[Winman]

Notice that your view admits to the very essence of our disagreement. Your view admits that human nature and the sin nature are distinct. Note you have man born without sin and thus a human nature without sin and thus not essential to the human nature. However, you believe the human nature can be later CONTAMINATED by sin and thus the sin nature is an ADDITIVE or a CORRUPTION of the human nature that comes later with willful sin and so something not essential to human nature.

Yes, I do believe all men corrupt themselves, that is what the scriptures say (Gen 6:12). The moment a person sins, they are no longer holy, they are no longer righteous, but a sinner. They cannot correct this, the only solution to this is to have their sins washed away in the blood of Christ.

But I do not believe it is some sort of contagion like a disease. Sin is a free will choice, just as it was for Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were created upright, no one thinks this undermines Christ, as soon as they sinned they needed Christ. It is the same for us, this is what I believe.

That is precisely, what the above commentators and we are teaching. All human beings are born with a human nature contaminated by sin due to the fall while Christ was born with an uncontaminated human nature.

They are corrupted in that they are no longer pure or righteous. Righteous means to be 100% pure without any sin whatsoever.

Hence, the issue of Hebrews 2:17 is not over the CONTAMINATION but over the human nature. Christ was born fully HUMAN in nature and that does not require or include the CONTAMINATIVE or ADDITIVE of the sinful nature.

No, Heb 2:16-17 says Jesus took on the nature of the seed of Abraham, not Adam. He was made like his brethren in ALL THINGS. Jesus had the exact nature we are born with and was tempted in all points as we are, yet without sin. He never corrupted himself by sinning.

Isaiah chapter one characterizes the sin nature as a PARASITE to the human nature rather than essential to human nature. It characterizes it as a CONTAMINATIVE to the human nature.

I don't know what you are talking about, it would have helped if you showed which scripture you are talking about, then we could discuss it.

Why not be consistent with your own view and admit that the contaminative sin nature is an ADDITIVE rather than a characteristic of human nature? Thus why not admit that Christ can be fully human in nature without a sinful nature while fallen man can be fully human in nature with the addition of a sinful nature without contradicting Hebrew 2:17???

I am consistent with my view. I believe every man is made upright as Ecc 7:29 says. We come into the world just like Adam and Eve, and just like Adam and Eve we all choose to sin and become sinners.

Your problem is that you fail to understand or recognize that the "death" which passed upon all men in Romans 2:17 is "spiritual" death - the contaminative or additive to human nature and it passed through the reproductive cycle through the father and the proof is that infants phyiscally die because they are condemned to physical death through partaking in the spiritual death which always leads to physical death.

I understand perfectly that the moment you sin you spiritually die, I have said this many times. But there is not one word in all of scripture to support that sin is passed by the father to his children, in fact, God says the son shall not bear THE INIQUITY of his father which contradicts your view. (Eze 18:20)

It is true that physical death is passed from Adam to us, this is the result of the curse.

Gen 3:19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.

It is true that all men die physically because of Adam's sin. But there is not one word in this curse concerning man's moral or spiritual nature, only his physical body (from dust to dust).

Isaiah chapter one proves the sin nature is an ADDITIVE to the human nature rather than

Again, you fail to show the specific verse(s) that you believe shows this.

 

[Winman]

Let me ask you something. Let's say you are an upright person (generally speaking). You are not a bank robber. Then, one day you decide to rob a bank. You are caught and tried and convicted for the crime. You are now a "bank robber". This can never be changed, you will be a bank robber until the day you die.

But does this change you physically? NO. Are you changed in any way as a moral agent? NO.

But you have changed concerning the law. A judgment has been passed upon you, and now you are a convicted felon.

This is what Romans 5 is saying, it is saying Adam introduced a judgment into the world. The judgment is that the wages of sin is death. There is not one word in Romans 5 saying Adam introduced some sort of physical depravity as you believe. It speaks of judgment and condemnation, these are legal terms, judicial terms, not physical.

Back in the 60's young people were experimenting with LSD. It was very harmful, but there was nothing the law could do about it, as there were no laws written against the use of LSD. Because people continued to use LSD, states everywhere passed legislation against it's use. Now if you used LSD you were a criminal, a felon.

So, these first persons who used LSD introduced a judgment, a condemnation for the use of LSD. This is what Adam did, he introduced a judgment, a condemnation for sin.

But the police did not round up every citizen for using LSD, you had to individually use it to be arrested for it's use. Once you did, you were tried and convicted of a felony, and could be jailed.

If these persons had not used LSD in the 60s, there would be no laws against it, no judgment, no condemnation for it's use, just as there were no laws against it when it was first invented in the 30s (I believe) until the 60s. So, these persons in the 60s introduced a judgment against LSD, and made all persons who used it thereafter criminals.

Can you understand that?

 

[The Biblicist]

Yes, I do believe all men corrupt themselves, that is what the scriptures say (Gen 6:12). The moment a person sins, they are no longer holy, they are no longer righteous, but a sinner. They cannot correct this, the only solution to this is to have their sins washed away in the blood of Christ.

Hence, according to your own view sin is not equal to human nature and therefore Hebrews 2:17 cannot be used to argue that human nature must or must not be without sin.

Therefore, it is perfectly legitimate to argue that Hebrews 2:17 does not demand that the "seed of Abraham" were naturally born with or without sin in order to be human in nature.

Hence, Adam was no more or no less human in nature after the fall as before the fall because sin does not determine what is or what is not human in nature! In Adam, sin was ADDITIONAL to human nature and thus not essential to be human in nature.

Therefore, if the "seed of Abraham" were all born sinners by nature but Christ was not born a sinner by nature has no bearing at all that he was "made like unto his brethren" in regard to HUMAN NATURE!

But I do not believe it is some sort of contagion like a disease. Sin is a free will choice, just as it was for Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve were created upright, no one thinks this undermines Christ, as soon as they sinned they needed Christ. It is the same for us, this is what I believe.

Do you beleive free will is sin? No, I don't think you do. Hence, sin is something foreign to the human nature and to the free will of man. It is something ACQUIRED in addition to the Human nature rather than something inherent in creation of human nature.

It is an ADDITIVE that can DEFILE human nature or a CONDITION that can corrupt Human nature. It is like a metaphorical filth that can cover the body (human nature) or a SICKNESS/PARASITE that can invade the body (human nature) but is FOREIGN to the body (human nature):

A. Parasite sickness:

Isaiah 1:5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.
6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.


B. Filthiness

Isa. 1:16 ¶ Wash you, make you clean...18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


The sin nature is a parasite and filth that has invaded the human nature at the fall of man and it is this parasite and filth that has been "passed" down from father to father. However, the incarnation avoided this contaminate, parasite, genetic disease passed down from Adam.

But there is not one word in all of scripture to support that sin is passed by the father to his children, in fact, God says the son shall not bear THE INIQUITY of his father which contradicts your view. (Eze 18:20)

However, this text is being jerked out of context by you and YOU KNOW IT! I could easily pit scripture against scripture like you do and quote the following verse:


Ex. 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

Romans 5:12 has to do with a RACE sin through a REPRESENTATIVE man wherein the entire human nature existed and acted and that is why "death" can be JUSTLY "passed down" to all men because all men consisted in the very human nature that acted in Adam.

 

[Winman]

Hence, according to your own view sin is not equal to human nature and therefore Hebrews 2:17 cannot be used to argue that human nature must or must not be without sin.

I believe Ecc 7:29 that says God hath made man upright. Therefore I do not believe we are sinful by nature, but become sinful when we actually sin. The word "sinful" is simply an adjective.

Therefore, it is perfectly legitimate to argue that Hebrews 2:17 does not demand that the "seed of Abraham" were naturally born with or without sin in order to be human in nature.

The seed of Abraham were made upright, but all sinned and became sinful. Jesus was made upright, but never sinned and became sinful.

Hence, Adam was no more or no less human in nature after the fall as before the fall because sin does not determine what is or what is not human in nature! In Adam, sin was ADDITIONAL to human nature and thus not essential to be human in nature.

Legally, Adam was very different after he sinned, he was a "sinner". He was no longer righteous or upright legally. Death is a judgment.

Therefore, if the "seed of Abraham" were all born sinners by nature but Christ was not born a sinner by nature has no bearing at all that he was "made like unto his brethren" in regard to HUMAN NATURE!

No, I believe they were all born upright, but every man will sin in time and become a sinner.

Do you beleive free will is sin? No, I don't think you do. Hence, sin is something foreign to the human nature and to the free will of man. It is something ACQUIRED in addition to the Human nature rather than something inherent in creation of human nature.

No, free will is not sin, but free will can be used to sin. I believe free will is innate, we are all born with free will.

It is an ADDITIVE that can DEFILE human nature or a CONDITION that can corrupt Human nature. It is like a metaphorical filth that can cover the body (human nature) or a SICKNESS/PARASITE that can invade the body (human nature) but is FOREIGN to the body (human nature):

You keep saying that, but you never show one word of scripture to support it.

A. Parasite sickness:

Isaiah 1:5 Why should ye be stricken any more? ye will revolt more and more: the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint.
6 From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrifying sores: they have not been closed, neither bound up, neither mollified with ointment.

I agree that sin here is compared to disease. But disease is unnatural. It is not natural to be diseased. A disease is a "disorder". If we were sinners by nature, then sin would be normal, it would not be a disorder, it would not be unnatural.

B. Filthiness

Isa. 1:16 ¶ Wash you, make you clean...18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.


The sin nature is a parasite and filth that has invaded the human nature at the fall of man and it is this parasite and filth that has been "passed" down from father to father. However, the incarnation avoided this contaminate, parasite, genetic disease passed down from Adam.

Yes, sin is compared to filth. But being filthy is disorder, it is not natural. If filth is natural, then why do we all seek to bathe ourselves and become clean?

However, this text is being jerked out of context by you and YOU KNOW IT! I could easily pit scripture against scripture like you do and quote the following verse:


Ex. 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

Note the last 5 words, "of them that hate me". God is angry at these children because they have followed in their father's footsteps and hate God. God is not angry at them without just cause.

Romans 5:12 has to do with a RACE sin through a REPRESENTATIVE man wherein the entire human nature existed and acted and that is why "death" can be JUSTLY "passed down" to all men because all men consisted in the very human nature that acted in Adam.

Adam represents those who disobey God, Jesus represents those who obey by faith. When you sin, you follow in the footsteps of Adam, when you believe on Jesus you follow in his footsteps. The free gift of justification of life is not automatically imputed to us, we have to believe as Jesus trusted his Father. Likewise, you must sin like Adam to come under the judgment and condemnation of sin.

 

[The Biblicist]

I believe Ecc 7:29 that says God hath made man upright. Therefore I do not believe we are sinful by nature, but become sinful when we actually sin. The word "sinful" is simply an adjective.

And when did God make man? God does not remake every man. Man was made to REPRODUCE after his own kind. God made man but ONCE and that is in Genesis 1:26-27 and he made him "upright" but it is man that sought out another design than God's "upright" standard.

You cannot possibly justify Ecclesians 7:29 being applied by context to the physical birth of every human when the Scriptures are very clear when and where God made man and in the "upright" image of God:

Gen. 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Nowhere in Scriptures does the Word of God EVER describe physical birth as the time or the act of man being "made" by God!

All the rest of your argument is based upon this eisgetical error and thus falls with it.

 

[Winman]

You don't get it, sin is unnatural. If we were born with a sin nature, then it would never occur to us that sin is wrong. We would kill and think nothing of it, because it would be perfectly natural. We would lie, and think nothing of it, because it would be natural. But even unsaved people know that killing and lying is wrong, it is a sin against nature. The scriptures show this.

Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Men know by their nature that the man and woman are made for each other. It is "against nature" for a man to be with a man, or a woman to be with a woman. If we were sinful by nature we would not recognize this. Because we are upright by nature, we recognize these sins as unnatural, a sin against nature.

If you were walking down the street, and a stranger suddenly approached you and punched you in the mouth, knocking you down, and then stealing your wallet, do you need a law to recognize this is wrong? NO. By nature you recognize this is wrong, it is against nature. If men were sinful by nature, it would be perfecty natural to act this way. We would not throw folks in jail if this was the natural way to act.

Think about it.

 

[Winman]

And when did God make man? God does not remake every man. Man was made to REPRODUCE after his own kind. God made man but ONCE and that is in Genesis 1:26-27 and he made him "upright" but it is man that sought out another design than God's "upright" standard.

Ecc 7:29 is speaking of all men, read carefully.

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

The word "they" shows scripture is speaking of all men, not just Adam. The scriptures show our soul and spirit come from God, not our parents.

Ecc 12:7 Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.

God gave your spirit to you, do your really want to accuse God of giving you a sinful spirit?

Isa 57:16 For I will not contend for ever, neither will I be always wroth: for the spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I have made.

God made your soul. Again, do you want to accuse God of making your soul sinful?

You cannot possibly justify Ecclesians 7:29 being applied by context to the physical birth of every human when the Scriptures are very clear when and where God made man and in the "upright" image of God:

Sure I can, the word "they" is plural and shows this is speaking of all men.

Gen. 1:26 ¶ And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Nowhere in Scriptures does the Word of God EVER describe physical birth as the time or the act of man being "made" by God!

All the rest of your argument is based upon this eisgetical error and thus falls with it.

Well after Adam and Eve the scriptures continue to say we are made in the likeness or similitude of God.

Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

This was said to Noah, at least a thousand years after Adam sinned.

Jam 3:9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.

You see, all these verses give you a problem because you believe the false doctrine of Original Sin. You have to wiggle around them. I on the other hand have not the least difficulty with these scriptures because the Bible says man is made upright, he is made in the likeness and similitude of God. I don't have to do mental gymnastics to explain away scripture as you do.

 

[DHK]

You don't get it, sin is unnatural.

Where do you get this idea, and can you give Scripture.
"We are by nature children of wrath.
Paul struggled against his own nature.
It was sin that dwelt in him.
By nature we lie. In fact we come forth from the womb speaking lies.
It is our nature to do evil, in as much as it is the leopard's nature to be born with spots, and the Ethiopian's nature to be born with black skin, so it is our nature to be born with a sin nature.

If we were born with a sin nature, then it would never occur to us that sin is wrong.

Nonsense. Romans 2:14,15--God gave man a conscience so that he knows when he sins; he knows automatically when he does right and wrong. God gave him the means to know. He has the law written on his heart; the moral law that is.

We would kill and think nothing of it, because it would be perfectly natural. We would lie, and think nothing of it, because it would be natural.

Some people do. Your children do. They lie and think nothing of it. You have to teach them to tell the truth. They don't tell the truth "from the womb." They lie "from the womb." Their first words were probably "Da da," when they really meant "ma ma."

But even unsaved people know that killing and lying is wrong, it is a sin against nature. The scriptures show this.

God has written his moral law on their hearts. God wouldn't have had to do that if they were born "innocent" without sin. Laws are for guilty people. Righteous people don't need the law. Righteous people don't break the law.

Rom 1:26

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Men know by their nature that the man and woman are made for each other. It is "against nature" for a man to be with a man, or a woman to be with a woman. If we were sinful by nature we would not recognize this. Because we are upright by nature, we recognize these sins as unnatural, a sin against nature.

This is scripture taken out of context, and you should be ashamed to do it.
It is not natural for two men to have sex together. That is not talking about the sin nature. That is speaking about what is natural for mankind--Christian or not, to do. It is not natural; the natural thing to do. It has nothing to do with the sin nature; it is simply speaking of sin; gross sin.

If you were walking down the street, and a stranger suddenly approached you and punched you in the mouth, knocking you down, and then stealing your wallet, do you need a law to recognize this is wrong?

If I were unsaved and living in the slums of Chicago, maybe I would recognize that this is a way of life. It is called gang warfare.

NO. By nature you recognize this is wrong, it is against nature. If men were sinful by nature, it would be perfecty natural to act this way. We would not throw folks in jail if this was the natural way to act.
Think about it.

You play a game of semantics not related to the topic, taking definitions of words. If these are theological words then you are engaged in neo-orthodoxy.

 

[Winman]

Where do you get this idea, and can you give Scripture.
"We are by nature children of wrath.
Paul struggled against his own nature.

Why would Paul struggle against sin if it were natural?

It was sin that dwelt in him.
By nature we lie. In fact we come forth from the womb speaking lies.
It is our nature to do evil, in as much as it is the leopard's nature to be born with spots, and the Ethiopian's nature to be born with black skin, so it is our nature to be born with a sin nature.

We do not lie by nature, unless there is something seriously wrong with you. When we lie, we recognize it is wrong, we recognize it is sin and feel ashamed.

Nonsense. Romans 2:14,15--God gave man a conscience so that he knows when he sins; he knows automatically when he does right and wrong. God gave him the means to know. He has the law written on his heart; the moral law that is.

Conscience by definition means to have a knowledge of good and evil, and an inclination toward doing what is right. Look it up in any dictionary.

Some people do. Your children do. They lie and think nothing of it. You have to teach them to tell the truth. They don't tell the truth "from the womb." They lie "from the womb." Their first words were probably "Da da," when they really meant "ma ma."

People harden themselves against their conscience, their conscience becomes seared. This all proves it is natural for man to do right, and unnatural to do wrong. If our nature were sinful, then sin would be natural and not offend our conscience.

God has written his moral law on their hearts. God wouldn't have had to do that if they were born "innocent" without sin. Laws are for guilty people. Righteous people don't need the law. Righteous people don't break the law.

If you have God's laws written in your heart, then you are not depraved.

This is scripture taken out of context, and you should be ashamed to do it.
It is not natural for two men to have sex together. That is not talking about the sin nature. That is speaking about what is natural for mankind--Christian or not, to do. It is not natural; the natural thing to do. It has nothing to do with the sin nature; it is simply speaking of sin; gross sin.

I just told you from scripture it is not natural for two men to be together. If we were sinful by nature, this would not occur to us.

If I were unsaved and living in the slums of Chicago, maybe I would recognize that this is a way of life. It is called gang warfare.

Baloney, even criminals know stealing is wrong. If you steal from a criminal, he will be offended just like you.

You play a game of semantics not related to the topic, taking definitions of words. If these are theological words then you are engaged in neo-orthodoxy.

I am not playing games at all, I am simply pointing out things that have never occurred to you because you have mindlessly accepted Original Sin without giving it serious thought.

More scripture showing our spirit and soul came from God, not our parents.

Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Jer 38:16 So Zedekiah the king sware secretly unto Jeremiah, saying, As the LORD liveth, that made us this soul, I will not put thee to death, neither will I give thee into the hand of these men that seek thy life.

Zech 12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

Num 16:22 And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation?

The scriptures are clear that God made our spirit and our soul, we did not inherit them from our parents. Those who believe we are born sinful are in effect accusing God of making sin.

 

[The Biblicist]

You don't get it, sin is unnatural.

That is my point! Man was not "made" with a sinful nature but made "upright" or in the image of God.

The real difference between us is WHEN did God make man upright versus WHEN did they seek out other designs than "upright" designs.

The only place in scripture where it is said that God made man according to his own "image" = upright is in Genesis 1:26-27.

From that point forward man is REPRODUCED after his own kind not "made" by God. Physical birth is NEVER referred to as being "MADE" by God.

All men were made upright when God created Adam because the whole entire human nature consisted in one man and when Adam sinned all men sinned because the entire human nature acted when Adam acted. That is precisely why "death" (spiritual death) can be JUSTLY "passed" down to all men and that is precisely why it is JUST for infants to suffer the condemnation of death.

If we were born with a sin nature, then it would never occur to us that sin is wrong.

It never occurs to children and that is why they must be TAUGHT what is right because they NATURALLY do what is wrong. No teaching necessary to do wrong as that comes by birth from the womb.

They are SPIRITUALLY BLIND to wrong.

We would kill and think nothing of it, because it would be perfectly natural. We would lie, and think nothing of it, because it would be natural. But even unsaved people know that killing and lying is wrong, it is a sin against nature.

Look at what you are saying! Yes, even unsaved persons know what you are saying and they are by NATURE children of wrath and they are UNREGNERATE and dead in tresspasses and sins.

Don't that tell you something? It tells me you don't even understand the sin nature after willful sin!!!!!!! If you were making this argument in regard to humanity BEFORE willful sin you point would have more validity but you are making this point of even those you admit to be dead spiritually.

The scriptures show this.

Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Men know by their nature that the man and woman are made for each other. It is "against nature" for a man to be with a man, or a woman to be with a woman. If we were sinful by nature we would not recognize this. Because we are upright by nature, we recognize these sins as unnatural, a sin against nature.

Spiritually dead people can grow in corruption just as a dead corpse can grow in corruption but it is dead when the brain waves stop as much as it is dead after 100 years in the tomb.

Spiritually dead people can be taught right from wrong by conscience, by society, by God's law and that teaching may RESTRAIN them from doing what they would otherwise NATURALLY do but it does not CHANGE their nature. They can even undergo worldly repentance which does not lead to life. But they have no HEART for holiness, truth and righteousness. They are SPIRITUALLY BLIND to the reality of sin in regard to God's holiness and any righteous disposition.

If you were walking down the street, and a stranger suddenly approached you and punched you in the mouth, knocking you down, and then stealing your wallet, do you need a law to recognize this is wrong? NO. By nature you recognize this is wrong, it is against nature. If men were sinful by nature, it would be perfecty natural to act this way. We would not throw folks in jail if this was the natural way to act.

Think about it.

In other words you are simply denying the existence of a sinful nature altogether whether in infants or even in adults who willfully sin! Wouldn't you admit that the man who knocked you down and robbed you was a sinner? Would you acknowledge that the person being knocked down and whose wallet was stolen is an adult past the age of accountability????

Here is what you admit.

1. You admit that sin is foreign to the human nature

2. You admit that when Adam sinned he became a sinner

3. You admit that Adam's sin brought death upon all men.

Here is what you fail to understand

1. All humanity existed in the person of Adam when Adam sinned and thus the whole of human nature acted when Adam acted - therefore death can be JUSTLY passed down to all humans individually because all men corporately sinned when Adam sinned.

2. All infants are subject to the CONDEMNATION of sin which is DEATH and DEATH is passed down to them from Adam's sin.

3. Willful sin in individuals merely manifests the sinful nature obtained through the fall of Adam and inherent through the reproduction process.

 

[DHK]

Why would Paul struggle against sin if it were natural?
We do not lie by nature, unless there is something seriously wrong with you. When we lie, we recognize it is wrong, we recognize it is sin and feel ashamed.

Conscience by definition means to have a knowledge of good and evil, and an inclination toward doing what is right. Look it up in any dictionary.

People harden themselves against their conscience, their conscience becomes seared. This all proves it is natural for man to do right, and unnatural to do wrong. If our nature were sinful, then sin would be natural and not offend our conscience.


If you have God's laws written in your heart, then you are not depraved.



I just told you from scripture it is not natural for two men to be together. If we were sinful by nature, this would not occur to us.

Baloney, even criminals know stealing is wrong. If you steal from a criminal, he will be offended just like you.



I am not playing games at all, I am simply pointing out things that have never occurred to you because you have mindlessly accepted Original Sin without giving it serious thought.

More scripture showing our spirit and soul came from God, not our parents.

Isa 42:5 Thus saith God the LORD, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

Jer 38:16 So Zedekiah the king sware secretly unto Jeremiah, saying, As the LORD liveth, that made us this soul, I will not put thee to death, neither will I give thee into the hand of these men that seek thy life.

Zech 12:1 The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

Num 16:22 And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation?

The scriptures are clear that God made our spirit and our soul, we did not inherit them from our parents. Those who believe we are born sinful are in effect accusing God of making sin.

Honestly, I have never seen a person pervert so much Scripture; not even in the theology forums.
All the Scripture you posted above can be illustrated in a simple illustration.

A proud mother says to another, as she introduces her six year old daughter, "And this is my beautiful innocent little daughter. She is such a big help to me."
She knows full well that her daughter has done wrong, has sinned, but she calls her innocent anyway. If you cannot understand English, and basic figures of speech when they are used you are in a bad way when reading the Bible.
I think your smart enough to understand but too bull-headed to rightly divide the word of truth because you don't want to give up a pet doctrine.

 

[Winman]

Honestly, I have never seen a person pervert so much Scripture; not even in the theology forums.
All the Scripture you posted above can be illustrated in a simple illustration.

A proud mother says to another, as she introduces her six year old daughter, "And this is my beautiful innocent little daughter. She is such a big help to me."
She knows full well that her daughter has done wrong, has sinned, but she calls her innocent anyway. If you cannot understand English, and basic figures of speech when they are used you are in a bad way when reading the Bible.
I think your smart enough to understand but too bull-headed to rightly divide the word of truth because you don't want to give up a pet doctrine.

No one is denying that all men sin. Even children sin. But sin is not natural, else we would not recognize it as sin. It is not sin for a lion to kill a zebra, that is it's nature. But it is wrong for a man to kill another man because it is not natural. By nature we know and recognize it is wrong. If men were utterly depraved as some falsely teach, we would all go about killing each other and every other imaginable sin, and no one would even notice. It would be the natural thing for us all to do, just like the lion killing the zebra. That is why the scriptures say all men are without excuse, because by nature we all know we are sinning.

I cannot help it if you cannot grasp this concept.

Look, we will always disagree, believe what you wish. You may get the last word if you wish, I really don't care.

 

[DHK]

No one is denying that all men sin. Even children sin. But sin is not natural, else we would not recognize it as sin. It is not sin for a lion to kill a zebra, that is it's nature. But it is wrong for a man to kill another man because it is not natural. By nature we know and recognize it is wrong. If men were utterly depraved as some falsely teach, we would all go about killing each other and every other imaginable sin, and no one would even notice. It would be the natural thing for us all to do, just like the lion killing the zebra. That is why the scriptures say all men are without excuse, because by nature we all know we are sinning.

I cannot help it if you cannot grasp this concept.

Look, we will always disagree, believe what you wish. You may get the last word if you wish, I really don't care.

It is your concept, one that you have embraced. It is not new. It is called Pelagianism. But you do have a different way of explaining it. Orthodox Christianity has rejected from the time of the apostles onward. It has always been rejected by both Protestants and Catholics alike. I don't know if you can quote anyone that is in agreement with your views. That in itself should tell you something is wrong. Are you right and the rest of Christianity wrong? You stand alone on this issue. Scripture after Scripture you take out of context and put a different spin on it trying to make it mean something it doesn't. Take a step back and look at things more objectively.

Adam and Eve were created "innocent." They were the only ones in the human race to be made that way. One could rightly say that they "had no knowledge of evil." But then Satan came and tempted Eve. When they both ate of the forbidden fruit And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked (Gen.3:7) Immediately they felt shame and guilt that they never had felt before. They now "knew" evil, for they had sinned. That is not the way that they were created.

(Gen 3:22) And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:
--Your argument of man being born innocent is the same as man being born as gods--the Mormon belief. It is not much different than Mormonism. We shall all be gods. Why?
You say sin is not natural. Doing good is natural.
This is also the belief of humanism and most other religions.

Only Christianity teaches that Christ came to reach a lost and fallen race, a people so fallen that there was nothing they could do to redeem themselves. No amount of good; no amount of righteous living could ever get them into heaven. Christ came into this world to save sinners--including infants. Your belief contradicts that Christ made a full atonement for sins. Christ did not atone the sins of the children. If that be true then you have condemned them to hell. The only way to heaven is through the blood of Christ. Your theology does not allow for that. All infants remain outside of Christ. His blood is not sufficient enough to cover the sin or sinful nature of infants. In no possible way will they ever enter into heaven, for ALL must come through the blood.

 

[The Biblicist]

No one is denying that all men sin. Even children sin. But sin is not natural, else we would not recognize it as sin.

Infants and little children are SPIRITUALLY BLIND to sin. They must be TAUGHT either by others what is right versus what is wrong and/or they must come to age so they can discern by experience what is right and wrong according to either conscience, cultural mores/laws or God's law. However, as infants they must be trained to recognize sin as they are naturally blind to sin.

However, infants and little children NEED NO TRAINING to sin because that comes by NATURE even though they do not recognize how they are acting or doing is sin.

Lost persons who are able to discern right from wrong do so by either because of previous training as children by parents or exposure to social mores and laws or experience with conscience.

They are naturally blind to sin and must be trained to recognize it. That is precisely why God gave the Law because of natural spiritual blindness to sin:

for by the law is the knowledge of sin. - Rom. 3:20b

Ro 7:7 ¶ What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

Man is NATURALLY BLIND to sin and must be TRAINED to see and recognize and discern sin!

It is not sin for a lion to kill a zebra, that is it's nature.

Animals are not made in the image of God and have no moral code or conscience. Hence an inappropriate illustration.

But it is wrong for a man to kill another man because it is not natural. By nature we know and recognize it is wrong. If men were utterly depraved as some falsely teach, we would all go about killing each other and every other imaginable sin, and no one would even notice. It would be the natural thing for us all to do, just like the lion killing the zebra. That is why the scriptures say all men are without excuse, because by nature we all know we are sinning.

This is not true when humans come into the world. IF infants came into the world with full grown bodies they would kill their parents in a heart beat and anyone else that crossed their desires. They sin NATURALLY even though they can't recognize how they act or what they do is sin. They need to be TRAINED to recognize sin and that training comes by instruction by parents, social mores, laws, experience with conscience at later age when able to discern.

Those Paul says are "without excuse" are those in context who have been already TAUGHT outwardly and inwardly and TRAINED to perceive right and wrong by interaction with parents, laws of nature, conscience, cultural mores, etc.

I cannot help it if you cannot grasp this concept.

Your concept is anti-Biblical and anti-experiential. All mankind comes into this world NATURAL BLIND to sin but sin without training because they are sinners by nature and therefore NATURAL sin without training. They must be TRAINED to discern and recognize sin after coming to a maturity so they are able to interact with their own conscience which has been previously aided by parents, social mores, laws or exposure to God's Law.