Human Nature versus Sinful nature

[Jerry Shugart]

Those "in the flesh" are those in the sphere controlled by the lusts, cravings and avenues of temptation provided by the five senses found in the flesh. Or under the controlling influence of indwelling sin.

I can agree with that but that is not the same thing as "sin" literally dwelling in anyone!

Also, was not Adam and Eve also 'in the flesh" BEFORE the fall?

Were they not controlled by lusts, cravings and avenues of temptation provided by the five senses found in the flesh? How else can their sins be accounted for?

So according to your own definition of the meaning of the phrase "in the flesh" even Adam and Eve existed in a "lost condition" before the fall:

There is a distinction between "IN" the flesh versus "walking AFTER" the flesh. The former describes the lost man's spiritual condition as a sphere of existence.

You also say:

The Sin nature is passed from "father" to children through natural birth BUT the sins of the "father" are not passed to children through birth (Ezek. 18:20).

The verse you cite is not speaking about "sins" being passed to children but instead it is saying that a son will not share the "guilt" of the father:

"The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son" (Ezek.18:20).

However, the Calvinists teach that the guilt of Adam's sin has been imputed to all of mankind, and that must include both of Adam's sons Cain and Abel:

"They (Adam & Eve) being the root of mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by original generation" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI./3).

According to your teaching the guilt of Adam's sin was imputed to both his sons despite the fact that this cannot and will not happen as revealed at Ezekiel 18:20.

In fact, you entire teaching about "Original Sin" is based on the false belief that the guilt of the sin committed by the father Adam is imputed to his sons!

 

[DHK]

I can agree with that but that is not the same thing as "sin" literally dwelling in anyone!

Why do you argue against this point.
Paul clearly says: "not me, but sin that dwells in me."
Does the Bible say the truth here or not?
Sin dwells in me, Paul says. Why are you arguing this point?

Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. (Romans 7:17)

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Why do you argue against this point.
Paul clearly says: "not me, but sin that dwells in me."
Does the Bible say the truth here or not?
Sin dwells in me, Paul says. Why are you arguing this point?

Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. (Romans 7:17)

You cannot distinguish between figurative language and things which are to be taken literally.

Please give me one definition of the Greek word translated "sin" which indicates that a "sin" can literally dwell in anyone.

 

[DHK]

Also, was not Adam and Eve also 'in the flesh" BEFORE the fall?

Were they not controlled by lusts, cravings and avenues of temptation provided by the five senses found in the flesh? How else can their sins be accounted for?

Christ had a human nature but not a sin nature. That was made possible by the virgin birth. He was conceived by the Holy Spirit and not by man.
Adam was created, not born. He was created with a human nature and not a sin nature. Once he sinned, God judged him. We have the account of the Fall. The entire creation is under a curse, not just Adam and Eve, but all creation. Adam had lost the image of God. Seth was born in the image of Adam. All mankind would be born with that image--it would be an image bearing a sin nature; a nature Adam was not created with; a nature Jesus was not born with.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

When one centers and limits inherited depravity to the physical realm as opposed to the will or the moral realm, when one centers depravity in the realm of natural proclivities as opposed to in the will of man itself, one is freed from the absurd notions of sin that OS imbibes. When one centers the depravity of man, passed down by the fall of man, to the realm of the sensibilities and not the will itself, sin becomes willful disobedience to a known commandment of God as Scripture states it is, and frees one from the absurdity of sin being something unavoidable yet blameworthy. Sin is only blameworthy because the will could avoid it if it would. When we center inherited depravity to the realm of physical propensities and not the will itself, we free God from being viewed as the author of sin, and in doing so place the guilt and blame squarely where it belongs, in the will of sentient beings.

 

[DHK]

You cannot distinguish between figurative language and things which are to be taken literally.

Please give me one definition of the Greek word translated "sin" which indicates that a "sin" can literally dwell in anyone.

I already have. All sin originates from within, from the heart.
Jesus said adultery is in the heart.

But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matthew 5:28)
--The sin of adultery is from within, committed in the heart.

 

[DHK]

You cannot distinguish between figurative language and things which are to be taken literally.

Please give me one definition of the Greek word translated "sin" which indicates that a "sin" can literally dwell in anyone.

Please define "premeditated murder".

 

[The Biblicist]

I can agree with that but that is not the same thing as "sin" literally dwelling in anyone!

Also, was not Adam and Eve also 'in the flesh" BEFORE the fall?

Were they not controlled by lusts, cravings and avenues of temptation provided by the five senses found in the flesh? How else can their sins be accounted for?

So according to your own definition of the meaning of the phrase "in the flesh" even Adam and Eve existed in a "lost condition" before the fall:

Those described "in the flesh" are always characterized by SINFUL lusts and cravings through the body. Adam was not "in the flesh" in that sense until the fall occurred. The fall was submission to sin bringing it into the body as an alien resident for the first time.

You also say:

The verse you cite is not speaking about "sins" being passed to children but instead it is saying that a son will not share the "guilt" of the father:

"The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son" (Ezek.18:20).

For the life of me I don't know why you compare this verse to Adam or the Last Adam because no other human's in history are put in the position of Adam or the Last Adam in regard to their own personal actions and its consequences upon other men. You are pitting Ezek 18:20 against Romans 5:12-19; 1 Cor. 15:22; 44-48!!!! What is true of all other men in Ezek. 18 is not true of TWO men in history in Romans 5:12-19 and anyone with common sense and the ability to read can easily see that because they are NOT LIKE ANY OTHER MEN IN HISTORY. However, it is your thesis that they are like every other man in history. However, the rediculousness of that theory is exposed by simply asking are ALL men "IN" you (1 Cor. 15:22)????? No! Does the consequences of your personal actions affect "ALL"? No! So much for the rubbish your theory!!!

So why do insist that Ezekiel 18:20 must be applied to Adam and Christ when it is obvious all men do not stand in their special relationship to all other men??????? You are pitting scripture against scripture to defend what is an obvious false doctrine.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: I already have. All sin originates from within, from the heart.
Jesus said adultery is in the heart.

But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matthew 5:28)
--The sin of adultery is from within, committed in the heart.

HP: DHK, you are knocking on the door of truth.:thumbsup:

If you would just stay consistent with your comments here, and simply acknowledge that the heart itself (not sin from Adam, Eve, or anyone or anything else) is the source of all sin. If you would simply say that the will of man is the source and 'cause' of sin and not any proclivity from birth, influence from Satan or the world as strong as those influences to sin might be, is the sole 'cause' of all of our sins.......

 

[The Biblicist]

HP: DHK, you are knocking on the door of truth.:thumbsup:

If you would just stay consistent with your comments here, and simply acknowledge that the heart itself (not sin from Adam, Eve, or anyone or anything else) is the source of all sin. If you would simply say that the will of man is the source and 'cause' of sin and not any proclivity from birth, influence from Satan or the world as strong as those influences to sin might be, is the sole 'cause' of all of our sins.......

You are born with the heart you have! That is why you need a NEW birth and a NEW heart. Just look at infants as they grow and are able to express themselves! Do they express the fruit of the Spirit that is inseparable from new birth or a spiritual nature??? No! They express the very opposite. They die! Because of their own personal individual willful sin? No! They are born with a sinful nature that subjects them to the condemnation of death.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Those described "in the flesh" are always characterized by SINFUL lusts and cravings through the body. Adam was not "in the flesh" in that sense until the fall occurred. The fall was submission to sin bringing it into the body as an alien resident for the first time.

Before the fall both Adam and Eve were both controlled by lusts, cravings and avenues of temptation provided by the five senses found in the flesh? How else can their sins be accounted for?

of course you just IGNORED my question.

You are pitting Ezek 18:20 against Romans 5:12-19; 1 Cor. 15:22; 44-48!!!!

I am pitting Ezekiel of18:20 againsts your false interpretation of the two verses which you cited. Of course in able to interpret Romans 5:12 so that it will match your interpretation you must edit what Paul actually wrots. You simply add the words in "bold" in order to make them match your false interpretation of the verses you mention:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned IN ADAM."

So much for the rubbish your theory!!!

It is your theory that is rubbish and the fact that you must edit the words of Paul in order to support your view proves that your theory is rubbish.

So why do insist that Ezekiel 18:20 must be applied to Adam and Christ when it is obvious all men do not stand in their special relationship to all other men??????? You are pitting scripture against scripture to defend what is an obvious false doctrine.

You obviously do not believe what is said here:

"The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son" (Ezek.18:20).

You and your fellow Calvinists teach that the guilt of Adam's sin has been imputed to all of mankind, and that must include both of Adam's sons Cain and Abel:

"They (Adam & Eve) being the root of mankind, the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity, descending from them by original generation" [emphasis added] (The Westminster Confession of Faith; VI./3).

Evidently all of this is above your limited understanding.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

"In a sense" ( sound familiar?) it can be said that 'sin dwells in us.' Certainly when one sins it also forms or heightens/ strengthens the ability of natural proclivities to influence the will. Sin is not a 'thing' within the flesh, but rather is a judgment of God upon the formed intents of the will.

 

[The Biblicist]

Before the fall both Adam and Eve were both controlled by lusts, cravings and avenues of temptation provided by the five senses found in the flesh? How else can their sins be accounted for?

of course you just IGNORED my question.

Can't read too well can you? I said it is IN the fall where internal sinful lust conceived the external act of sin. Not before the fall! Huge difference. Hence, before the fall they were not "in the flesh" as I defined it for you. You cannot disprove my definition so you pervert it and distort it and misapply it - your normal MO!

I am pitting Ezekiel of18:20 againsts your false interpretation of the two verses which you cited.

You cannot answer the objections I cited so you just repeat.

You cannot explain the peculiar relationship that Adam and Christ had in relationship to many that CONTRADICTS your application of Ezek. 18:20 to both Christ and Adam and so you merely repeat.

Is there a thinking man on this forum who can answer the objections I put to Jerry (Because Jerry simply ignores them).

 

[DHK]

You cannot explain the peculiar relationship that Adam and Christ had in relationship to many that CONTRADICTS your application of Ezek. 18:20 to both Christ and Adam and so you merely repeat.

Is there a thinking man on this forum who can answer the objections I put to Jerry (Because Jerry simply ignores them).

Though I agree with most of your conclusions I believe it is wrong for you to use Ezek.18:20 for a proof-text here. It has nothing to do with this subject. The context there is: murder, oppressing the poor, cruelty, and Capital Punishment. The son (of the father who commits such atrocities) shall not bear the iniquity of the father. Just because his father was a murderer or rapist, does not mean that the son should automatically be classified as one. That is the meaning of the verse. I wish people would not take it out of context.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I already have. All sin originates from within, from the heart.
Jesus said adultery is in the heart.

But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. (Matthew 5:28)
--The sin of adultery is from within, committed in the heart.

I agree with you that a thought can be considered a sin so it can dwell in someone. You are right and I was wrong.

However, the whole point in regard to this question concerns the difference between human nature and sinful nature. Did not Eve have thoughts which could be in regard to sin dwelling in her with what is said here in view?

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" (Gen.3:6).

Did she not desire the tree because she thought it could make her wise so even before she actually partook of it she had thought of having it. Was that not a sin that happened even before she partook of it?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You cannot answer the objections I cited so you just repeat.

I answered what you said so I will repeat what I said:

I am pitting Ezekiel of18:20 againsts your false interpretation of the two verses which you cited. Of course in able to interpret Romans 5:12 so that it will match your interpretation you must edit what Paul actually wrote. You simply add the words in "bold" in order to make them match your false interpretation of the verses you mention:

"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned IN ADAM."

 

[DHK]

I agree with you that a thought can be considered a sin so it can dwell in someone. You are right and I was wrong.

However, the whole point in regard to this question concerns the difference between human nature and sinful nature. Did not Eve have thoughts which could be in regard to sin dwelling in her with what is said here in view?

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" (Gen.3:6).

Did she not desire the tree because she thought it could make her wise so even before she actually partook of it she had thought of having it. Was that not a sin that happened even before she partook of it?

No, that was a part of the image and likeness of God that God created them in. It was moral free choice. She was given the choice to choose between good and evil. Satan knew that. "Thou shalt not surely die," he said. "You shall become as gods knowing good and evil." The last part was true. They knew only good. They ate and then they knew good and evil. But they chose to eat of their own free will. God gave them that free will. They could have chosen the Tree of Life instead. But they didn't. It was the wrong choice. Their mistake; their sin. No one forced them, not even a sin nature. Now we sin by nature.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK in reference to a post by Biblicist: Though I agree with most of your conclusions I believe it is wrong for you to use Ezek.18:20 for a proof-text here. It has nothing to do with this subject. The context there is:

HP: This is your conscience speaking. Why be so hard on Biblicist over context? What about your misuse and failure to closely examine the context of Psalms 14, 53 and 58?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

No, that was a part of the image and likeness of God that God created them in.

Before Eve ate of the forbidden tree she "desired" it because it could make her wise:

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" (Gen.3:6).

She had this "desire" for the tree before she partook of it so she had a desire for that which was forbidden. What is the difference between that and what the Lord Jesus spoke of here?:

"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matthew 5:28).

The Greek word translated "lust after" means "to have a desire for" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

Secondly, are you saying that 'infants" desire forbidden things? If your answer is "no" then you have not yet demonstrated that sin dwells in infants.

 

[Winman]

Before Eve ate of the forbidden tree she "desired" it because it could make her wise:

"And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat" (Gen.3:6).

She had this "desire" for the tree before she partook of it so she had a desire for that which was forbidden. What is the difference between that and what the Lord Jesus spoke of here?:

"But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matthew 5:28).

The Greek word translated "lust after" means "to have a desire for" (Thayer's Greek English Lexicon).

Secondly, are you saying that 'infants" desire forbidden things? If your answer is "no" then you have not yet demonstrated that sin dwells in infants.

Actually, Eve demonstrated the three lusts of the world shown in 1 John 2:16

1 Jn 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

We see these three types of lusts in Eve before the fall. The tree looked good for food, that is the lust of the flesh. The tree was pleasant to look upon, that is the lust of the eyes. The tree was desired to make one wise, that is the pride of life. These three lusts are even shown in the exact order shown here in Gen 3:6.

Eve had all the lusts we have, yet God called her very good. Why? Because until this time she had never sinned. But after eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil she was evil and a sinner.

It is not our nature with desires that makes us evil. It is when you actually sin that you spiritually die and become evil.

Calvinism teaches the exact opposite of scripture, Calvinism teaches that you are born dead, which causes you to sin. The scriptures say we sin, and this causes us to die. Exact opposites.

The wages of sin is death, not the wages of death is sin. But that is what many falsely teach.