Pitchback
I do not appreciate your "sidestepped" remark. Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they are being deceitful.
But you still sidestepped by playing the victim, you did not address whether we are conceived in a united with God state or a separated from God state.
I do not interpret being "made sinners" as you do. I believe that it was Adam's example and influence that makes others sinners, just as the writings of Karl Marx made many socialists, and the writings of Charles Darwin made many evolutionists. When we follow the example of Adam we are made sinners just as he was, just as a person who follows Marx becomes a socialist. It does not mean Marx's actual thoughts are imputed to those who believe his ideas.
Scripture does not say by Adam’s influence the many were made sinners when they learned of Adam. The idea that for those hundreds if not thousands of years between Adam and Moses, when the Genesis account was written or compiled, all those scattered folks even knew of Adam. Absurd.
How can a newborn baby be condemned for unbelief? This is nonsensical. A newborn baby cannot even form thoughts at first, they certainly cannot understand spiritual matters. Total nonsense.
Your argument is not with me but with scripture. Condemnation was the result of Adam’s transgression as I posted above. How can you deny scripture? Total nonsense.
God himself called these infants "my children", I believe what God says, not what men say. If we are truly born children of wrath or children of the devil as you believe I hardly believe God would make the mistake of calling infants "my children".
Still sidestepping the idea that God as creator can call everyone His children. Numerous examples are found in the text.
I disagree, it means exactly what it says, that we have "returned" to God, just as the prodigal son returned to his father. When he did, Jesus twice said he was "alive again" which would be absolutely impossible if we are born dead in sin as you and others believe. In the three stories of sinners that are one parable in Luke 15, Jesus showed sinners not originally lost. The shepherd had 100 sheep, one was afterward lost, the women had 10 pieces of silver, one was afterward lost, and the father had two sons, one was afterward lost. This parable and all other scripture agrees with my view and refutes yours.
You are denying the very words of scripture. “Return” is translating a Greek compound word, meaning “to” “turn” and so there is no support for returning to a previous place. Thus this verse does not indicate a person was in the shepherd’s hand, and then escaped.
I don't care about your concepts, I care about what the scriptures actually say. This term is used only once in all of scripture and is speaking of the physical resurrection of our bodies, not spiritual death.
But what about the biblical concept of being in Christ. Do you care about that concept? And if a person is not "in Christ" they are someplace else. You can call it the realm of darkness rather than "in Adam" but it is a separated from God state. To repeat the question you are running from, were you "in Christ" when you were conceived? I say no for no one can be snatched out of His hand. Thus a sin would not create a divide. This is not rocket science.
If you believe Adam's sin is unconditionally imputed to all men, then you must believe that justification unto life by Jesus Christ is unconditionally imputed to all men. To do otherwise is to be completely inconsistent to what these scriptures are directly saying.
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
You can't say that identical statements made in the same verse and context have different meanings. If the judgment is unconditionally imputed to us, then the free gift must be unconditionally imputed to all men in the same way. You are inconsistent, you believe the judgment is unconditionally imputed to all men, but the free gift is conditionally imputed to all men.
Romans 5:18 says the judgment and the gift came to all men. However the judgment was applied, resulting in condemnation, verse 16, but the gift simply abounded to all men. A judgment is not a gift. No need to pretend the distinction is not apparent in the text.
I believe the judgment is conditionally imputed to us when we sin just as Adam did, and the free gift is conditionally imputed to us when we believe as Jesus diid. There is no inconsistency in my view.
We start out alive, therefore we can die when we sin. We can be "alive again" when we trust Christ. This is exactly what Jesus said concerning the prodigal son in Luke 15. It is not complicated.
If we are "in Christ" we are alive together with Christ. But if we are "in Christ" we cannot die. Therefore to have died means to be separated and as I said, we are separated at conception, but we have not sinned ourselves and Adam's sin has not been imputed to us for God does not punish the son for the sins of the father. But the consequence of the father's sin is visited upon the family.
[/QUOTE]No sin could bring forth death as James 1 says if you are already dead. The wages of sin would not be death, the wages of being conceived would be death. You cannot kill someone who is already dead. Nonsense.[/QUOTE] Please stop sidestepping and repeating what has been rebutted. A person who is conceived upright has not earned the wages of sin. Therefore, when a person sins, they become unholy. So, first they were conceived in a separated from God state, then they sin and "earn" their own place of separation. And as far as a dead man not being able to die again, we have the second death facing the lost so dying to different things, meaning separating occurs all the time. We are dead, yet when we are born anew, we die to sin.
There is not one mention of Adam's descendants spiritually dying at the fall. God did not tell Adam his children would be cursed and born spiritually dead. This would be far worse than any curse upon the ground which made bringing forth food more difficult, yet God did not mention it whatsoever. This would be the most important doctrine in the Bible besides the gospel, yet God forgot to mention it? Absurd.
We were all condemned through Adam's transgression.
God clearly says the son shall not bear the iniquity of his father in Eze 18:20. If Adam's sin is imputed to us, God would be breaking his own law.[/QUOTE]
And you close with a strawman, I have stated over and over the condemnation was the consequence of Adam's sin, not punishment for Adam's sin.
Winman you have made all these assertions before and seem unwilling to address the rebuttals.
When you were conceived, were you "in Christ" or not in Christ? Please answer that question.