Post 199 is an open denial of the Christian faith and of the Christian Jesus
What? Are folks just supposed to take your word for this? Would you like to explain how or why post 199 is an open denial of the Christian faith and Christian Jesus?
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Post 199 is an open denial of the Christian faith and of the Christian Jesus
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blasphemya : the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God
Winman,
Instead of answering your entire post I will be brief.
Scripture does not contradict Scripture. I trust we can agree there.
Note well what the Scripture does say here:
Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
Christ came in the likeness of sinful flesh.
First, it was a likeness. It was not the same.
Second, it was a likeness of sinful flesh. It was not the same flesh as yours or any other human. If it were it would be sinful.
Third, it was not sinful because he was virgin born and thus avoided inheriting the sin nature. On that note he also was not conceived by a man but conceived by the Holy Spirit. His nature was thus fully man and fully divine at the same time.
Fourth, being fully divine and fully man (the God-man), how could you even dare to compare your nature with His. I consider that blasphemous.
--The word "blasphemous" means that which insults our Lord.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/blasphemy
Comparing yourself, your flesh to that of Christ is most insulting, and therefore blasphemous.
Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
--There are reasons for prophecies. There was a reason that he was conceived of the Holy Spirit and not by man. If God simply wanted to perform an outstanding miracle he could have had a man give birth to a child and made it really miraculous! He chose not to do that. He chose a virgin. He avoided men altogether. Through man comes the sin nature.
The McGuffey Reader puts it this way:
"In Adam's fall;
We sinned all."
Both the concept of Original Sin and the doctrine of the Depravity of man are two of the fundamentals of the faith that have been believed on since the apostles. To deny them is to step outside of Christian Orthodoxy.
It is a glaring contradiction!Yes, Jesus came in the likeness of "sinful" flesh. But he came in "the same" flesh. That is not a contradiction.
All flesh in sinful flesh. All flesh is born under the curse.See, you believe men are born sinful, I do not. Jesus came in "the same" flesh we are all born in, which is not sinful. It is only when we sin that we become sinful. Jesus never sinned, so he only came in the likeness of sinful flesh.
You take this passage out of context and use it again and again to contradict other passages of the Bible.As far as comparing Jesus's nature to mine, the scriptures do that. The scriptures say Jesus took on the nature of the seed of Abraham, that he was made like unto his brethren the Jews "in all things".
Heb 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted.
Whether you like it or not, the scriptures say Jesus took part of "the same" flesh and blood that we partake of, that he took on "the nature" of the seed of Abraham (not Adam), and was made like unto his brethren in "all things".
It is YOU and many others here that do not believe what scripture directly says.
It is a glaring contradiction!
All flesh in sinful flesh. All flesh is born under the curse.
Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
--No Kingdom of God for Christ! He was "in the flesh;" had a "flesh nature." It was just like ours, or so you say.
--All flesh is sinful flesh.
Romans 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
--We are born with "sinful flesh" i.e., a sinful nature of flesh, a depraved nature. You say Jesus had the same thing.
Romans 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
--Jesus walked after the flesh?? He had a flesh nature?
All flesh is sinful flesh.
Romans 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
--According to you Jesus could not please God. He had sinful flesh.
Romans 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.
--Jesus also has a corrupted body, and waits for his redemption. For his flesh is like ours.
You take this passage out of context and use it again and again to contradict other passages of the Bible.
First, the book: It is called "Hebrews." It is addressed to Jewish Christians. They were discouraged because of the persecution they were receiving at the hands of both Romans and their own Jewish families. Throughout the book the author compares and contrasts the old Temple service to what we have in Christ. What we have in Christ is "better," a key word in the book.
In chapter two he is contrasting Christ to angels.
When Christ took upon himself humanity he was made lower than the angels who are spirit beings. That is one comparison.
The reason he did that is that angels cannot die; cannot taste death; have no idea of what it is to suffer for others.
The comparison: Jesus took on humanity so that he could know all these things and reassure us that he did suffer for us whereas angels could not.
In verse 14 he simply states that he took upon himself flesh and blood so that he could die for us. That is a comparison. Angels could not do that.
In verse 16 he re-emphasizes the same thing to his audience:
Hebrews 2:16 For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Angels could not do what Christ did. He took upon himself flesh and blood, not the exact same nature as us, but simply flesh and blood, flesh and blood like Abraham had. He is speaking to Jewish Christians. He is appealing to their heritage now.
Hebrews 2:17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
--Note the clarification of verse 16:
He is LIKE unto his brethren, not that he has the exact same flesh, but only is LIKE his brethren. They could never be the same. They don't have the same nature. He was different. He was a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
A person with the sinful nature, with the same nature that you have Winman, does not fit this bill. Jesus did not have this nature. Understand what is being said here. Understand the context.
You just don't get the Book of Hebrews do you?Nevertheless, we are directly told that Jesus took part of "the same" flesh and blood we all partake of. We are directly told that Jesus took on himself the nature of the seed of Abraham, who was born after the fall (not a problem for me, as I believe men are made upright), and we are told Jesus was made like unto his brethren the Jews "in all things".
You just don't get the Book of Hebrews do you?
The author was identifying with the Jews.
He did not come as a mighty Roman, a conquering Greek, a rich Egyptian, a philosophizing Persian, etc. He came as a JEW, a lowly Israelite, the father of whom was Abraham. He identified himself with the Jewish nation. That is what he is saying here. He is not talking about his actual flesh. He is identifying himself with the nation or race of people. He came as a Jew--the people whose lowly history is recorded in the annals of eternity in the Bible of failure after failure; rebellion after rebellion. It is shameful history. And he identifies himself with this race of people. Not only was he born in a manger! He was born to the Jewish race, i.e. of the seed of Abraham.
You receive your mother's father's DNA through your mother. Jesus received David's "seed" through Mary. In fact, Jesus had DNA all the way back to Adam through Mary.
It is shameful to post such blasphemous ideas on a Christian site.Dhk has offered the orthodox position....you are in unbelief.
heresy
Yes the Jews are like other men; no one said they are not. That is not the point the author of the Book of Hebrews was making.It doesn't make one bit of difference, Jews are men just like any other men.
Yes, and so?Jesus took part of "the same" flesh and blood as his fellow Jews. He took on the nature of the seed of Abraham, who was born after the fall, and he was made like unto his brethren the Jews in all things. He "suffered" being tempted, he could be touched with the "feeling" of our infirmities and was tempted in "all points" as we are, yet without sin.
He did not have sinful flesh. He did not have a sin nature. He did not need to be saved. He was not born a sinner. You need to be saved; he didn't. Why? What's the difference? It is the sinful flesh! That is the difference.Being flesh with lusts does not make you evil. Jesus was hungry after he fasted 40 days, and that is exactly why the devil tempted him to turn stones into bread. Jesus "felt" this temptation, probably more than we could ever realize. But he did not obey his flesh and therefore did not sin.
She was created not born; different story.Again, Eve was tempted by the three worldly lusts shown in 1 John 2:16. They are even described in perfect order. Was she sinful at this point? NO, she was not sinful until she actually sinned.
As consistent as Swiss cheese--full of holes.You can disagree with my position all you want, but you cannot find fault with it, and you cannot find an inconsistency in it.
Men are not born upright. Again (just like the J.W.'s here) you are taking Scripture way out of its context. This is a bad and terrible habit.If men are born upright as I believe they are (Ecc 7:29) then Jesus could have "the same" flesh and blood as us, the same nature as us, and be made like us in all things and not be sinful.
Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.The difference is, all men choose to sin and "become filthy", Jesus did not.
Gen 6:12
Again you take Scripture out of context! When will it stop?And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
The word corrupted means to go from good to bad. It shows a progression.
Psa 14:3
What you are showing is the Second law of Thermodynamics in action. Things have a tendency to get worse as time goes by. Jesus also predicted the same. He said: "When I come will I find faith on the earth." Things are going to get progressively worse. This is nothing new.They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
The scriptures repeatedly say we have gone astray, or gone out of the way, which shows we were originally in the way. They say we have "become filthy" which shows a progression from good to bad.
If you pay attention you will literally see many dozens, perhaps hundreds of verses that all show we have gone from good to bad. The scriptures do not show us originally evil.
DHK said:Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
--We have no choice. We are born this way. In fact we are born into the devil's family and thus must be born a second time into God's family.
DHK said:What you are showing is the Second law of Thermodynamics in action.
I have taken a great deal of time and effort to show how you continually take a simple verse of Scripture and turn it upside down and backwards to show us that the true and Biblical meaning is the opposite of what it is supposed to be. A shameful practice.DHK, your posts tend to get longer and longer. I am going to answer just a few lines.
This is a perfect example of what I speaking about:This is a perfect example of the truth being right before your eyes, but because of false doctrine you are blinded to it.
Does Isa 64:6 show we are born sinful? NO, it shows the exact opposiste.
No piece of clothing ever starts out as a filthy rag, NONE. All clothing starts out clean and whole. In time it becomes filthy and torn, but no clothing starts out that way EVER.
Most of the time the Bible is not referring to processes but to objects. You read into it more than is there. There is a word for that--eisigesis.No leaf starts out faded and brown. All leaves begin tender, green and alive. It is only after time that a leaf withers, turns brown and dies.
No leaf starts out on the ground, all leaves are originally on the tree. Only after time do they fade and the wind breaks them off and carries them away.
Show me one word in the verse that indicates a progression.This verse, like all the others I showed, shows a progression from good to evil, a progression from life to death. We are not born dead, just as no leaf is originally dead. We do not start out filthy, just as no piece of clothing starts out filthy, but clean.
Those aren't the words of Augustine. Where do you get that from. It is not Augustine 2:3; it is Isaiah 64:6! Wake up Winman!The truth is right before your eyes, but because you have been taught the error of Augustine you are completely blind to it.
There is no progression in the verse! You haven't shown any.No, what you are seeing is a progression from life to death. All leaves start out alive, but die later. Likewise, we start out alive and clean, but sin makes us filthy and kills us. This is why Paul said he was ALIVE without the law once, but when the commandment came, sin revived and he DIED.
You will see this progression over and over again if you open your eyes.
Let me add some additional information to this to show how wrong it is.This is a perfect example of the truth being right before your eyes, but because of false doctrine you are blinded to it.
Does Isa 64:6 show we are born sinful? NO, it shows the exact opposiste.
No piece of clothing ever starts out as a filthy rag, NONE. All clothing starts out clean and whole. In time it becomes filthy and torn, but no clothing starts out that way EVER.
No leaf starts out faded and brown. All leaves begin tender, green and alive. It is only after time that a leaf withers, turns brown and dies.
Let me add some additional information to this to show how wrong it is.
The actual term "filthy rags" in the Hebrew, according to MacArthur and Jamieson, Faucett and Brown, is "menstrous cloth." It is not just any filthy rag; it is a very specific filthy rag.
filthy rags — literally, a “menstruous rag” (Lev_15:33; Lev_20:18; Lam_1:17).
In two other translations we see the same thing:
The Modern King James:
(MKJV) But we are all as the unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as a menstruation cloth. And we all fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
Literal Translation
(LITV) But we are all as the unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as a menstruation cloth. And we all fade as a leaf, and like the wind our iniquities take us away.
Anyone can see that there is no process involved here. The Bible teaches that as soon as the cloth touches the woman it is unclean. As soon as a man touches the woman in her period he is unclean.
Leviticus 15:27 And whosoever toucheth those things shall be unclean, and shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.
--No process. If anyone would just touch the cloth they were unclean.
This was serious:
Leviticus 15:29 And on the eighth day she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons, and bring them unto the priest, to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.
30 And the priest shall offer the one for a sin offering, and the other for a burnt offering; and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.
Leviticus 15:31 Thus shall ye separate the children of Israel from their uncleanness; that they die not in their uncleanness, when they defile my tabernacle that is among them.
--If the appropriate sacrifice was not made for the uncleanness afterward, then the penalty was death.
This was not a picture of a rag slowly slowly becoming dirty.
This is a picture of a cloth becoming immediately unclean as soon as it touches the body.
As soon as one is born we are unclean; have a tainted nature; a sin nature. We don't have to wait for it. We are unclean, depraved from birth.
We are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags. They are that way; they don't become that way.
Read the Scriptures given.Baloney, no woman would put on a soiled piece of cloth but perfectly clean. It would become soiled afterward.
Read the Scriptures given.
As soon as it touches the body it is rendered unclean.
No progression.
As soon as one is born, he is born a sinner. No progression.
Jeremiah 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.
1. An Ethiopian is born black, and will always be so.
2. A leopard is born with spots and cannot change it.
3. A man is born a sinner and cannot, without the grace of God, change himself.
I have taken a great deal of time and effort to show how you continually take a simple verse of Scripture and turn it upside down and backwards to show us that the true and Biblical meaning is the opposite of what it is supposed to be.
A shameful practice.
.This is a perfect example of what I speaking about:
Isaiah 64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.
--Isaiah is simply using a "filthy rag" as an object lesson. He is not going into the details of the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics. He is not explaining the processes of decay and deterioration to the Israelites. He tells the entire nation (infant, toddler, youth, teen, adult, elderly, etc.), the entire nation--they are ALL as filthy rags. It is not a process
Leviticus 15:27 And whosoever toucheth those things shall be unclean, and shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be unclean until the even.Of course it is a progression, no woman would put on a filthy garment, it would be perfectly clean. It then "becomes filthy" when it is used. You are just being ridiculous.
And no leaf starts out faded and dead, all leaves start out green and alive. The scripture directly says we all do "fade" as a leaf. That is a progression from life to death.
As I have pointed out from time to time, you stand outside of 2,000 years of orthodox Christianity. It is not my loss, but yours. How many on this board have you convinced of your unorthodoxy? You do realize where you stand don't you? It is not withing the realm of orthodox Christianity.You just don't want to see it. Your loss.
My interpretation gives no one any excuse.As for Jeremiah 13:23, your interpretation would have given these Jews the perfect excuse. They could have said, "What do you expect Jeremiah? We were born this way, we have no choice but to sin!". And if your interpretation were correct, that would be absolutely true.
The "natures" of both were changed under the curse.And let me ask you this, who gave the leopard his spots? Who gave the Ethiopian his dark skin? Your interpretation blames God!
All three were born a distinct way. Black, spotted, and evil.No, Jeremiah was simply saying these folks were so stubborn and obstinate in sin that it had almost become their nature, as IF they were born this way.
They were accustomed to it because they had been doing it all their lives. They were born that way.And the word "accustomed" means a learned behavior. For instance, when someone first smokes cigarettes they cough and choke because it is unnatural, but if they continue to smoke they become "accustomed" to it.
Yes he was. It is very obvious.Jeremiah was not teaching that we are born sinners.