Original Sin Or Committed Sin

[webdog]

I can point to dozens of Scripture that substantiate the depravity of man and original sin--as I have done for you many times--and you simply dismiss. But you cannot point to any Scripture which demonstrates sin on the part of David's mother. You cannot substantiate or demonstrate that what you say is Scriptural. Your philosophy is vain.

What's with the argument from silence? I hope you are not implying David's mother was without sin! Of course she was a sinner!

These "dozens" of Scripture turn out to be 2 - 3 questionable use of the Psalms and many verses plucked from context.

 

[DHK]

7 chapters separate one Psalm stating we are sinner then from conception, one from birth...which is it? To build a theology on poetic language that is not to be taken literally in all instances is shaky hermeneutics

Why not read the full psalm. It is not as poetic as you think. The main thing to keep in mind is that it is a psalm of repentance, sorrow, remorse. It was a psalm written shortly after David's sin of adultery and murder, shortly after Nathan came to him. In great grief and repentance David pours out his heart to God asking forgiveness. Go through it verse by verse. Every verse is intensely personal--between David and God and no other person.
Verses like:
"Against thee and thee only have I sinned." He doesn't even take into account Bathsheba or Uriah or their family or Israel. His sin was against God.

To be like Adam and to find fault with his mother is totally against the context of this psalm and against the character of David. He would never do such a thing. He is not even thinking of his mother. His mother isn't even in his thoughts here. It is his birth that he is thinking of and what happened there in God's eyes. He inherited a sin nature. Continually throughout the whole psalm he focuses on his sin before God. That sin started at conception when he inherited a sin nature. It did not start with his mother, though it started when he was in his mother's womb. His focus is on himself--all the time; his relation between him and God. It is a psalm of repentance between him and God alone.

Against thee and thee alone have I sinned. In no manner would he bring his mother into such a psalm or repentance, such a personal psalm of remorse and guilt asking forgiveness from the Lord. His mother has nothing to do with this. It was HIS sin, not his mother's.

 

[DHK]

What's with the argument from silence? I hope you are not implying David's mother was without sin! Of course she was a sinner!

These "dozens" of Scripture turn out to be 2 - 3 questionable use of the Psalms and many verses plucked from context.

I see you have not read many of my posts.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Yes many of us have read your posts carefully DHK.
You need to take up something productive like fighting windmills. You put up your own paper ducks to shoot at. No one has ever stated David was ‘blaming’ his mother, or that Psalm 51 was not about his own personal sin. ‘In sin did my mother conceive me’ are the words he used and you emphatically state that his mothers sin was not mentioned? Your blindness runs deep. The least one could admit is to the clear possibility he was in fact speaking of his mothers sin, not to blame her for his sin but rather to show that the sins of his mother indeed have a profound effect upon his life. His focus is clearly upon his mother in verse 5 when again he speaks of the influence of ones sin upon their posterity. Of a truth, sin influences ones posterity. I have seen it in the lives of some I know intimately. I have seen it in my own life as well, sad to say. When one couple I knew divorced, five of their children have either divorced or had serious marriage issues. It is obvious to anyone that knows this family that divorce and problems so often breed divorce and problems.

We see it our society over all. There is nothing strange in the least with David mentioning the effects of the sin of others example having a profound effect on his life as well.

Explain David’s half sisters DHK. Who was their father according to Scripture? Why did Jesse not bring one particular son “David’ when he was told by the prophet to bring ‘all’ his sons and that one would be anointed as a future king? That is not some isolated incident, but a preponderance of evidence David was in fact an illegitimate child. Why is it said that the Jews always looked upon David as an illegitimate child? But no! DHK will not even accept the possibility he could be wrong. Why would David write in a manner, or support any such notion in his Psalms that was a completely foreign notion to Rabbinical Judaism? Oh I know why DHK can have it no other way. He has a presupposition, an Augustinian dogma to support and will not have it any other way.

 

[Amy.G]

Yes many of us have read your posts carefully DHK.
You need to take up something productive like fighting windmills. You put up your own paper ducks to shoot at. No one has ever stated David was ‘blaming’ his mother, or that Psalm 51 was not about his own personal sin. ‘In sin did my mother conceive me’ are the words he used and you emphatically state that his mothers sin was not mentioned? Your blindness runs deep. The least one could admit is to the clear possibility he was in fact speaking of his mothers sin, not to blame her for his sin but rather to show that the sins of his mother indeed have a profound effect upon his life. His focus is clearly upon his mother in verse 5 when again he speaks of the influence of ones sin upon their posterity. Of a truth, sin influences ones posterity. I have seen it in the lives of some I know intimately. I have seen it in my own life as well, sad to say. When one couple I knew divorced, five of their children have either divorced or had serious marriage issues. It is obvious to anyone that knows this family that divorce and problems so often breed divorce and problems.

We see it our society over all. There is nothing strange in the least with David mentioning the effects of the sin of others example having a profound effect on his life as well.

Explain David’s half sisters DHK. Who was their father according to Scripture? Why did Jesse not bring one particular son “David’ when he was told by the prophet to bring ‘all’ his sons and that one would be anointed as a future king? That is not some isolated incident, but a preponderance of evidence David was in fact an illegitimate child. Why is it said that the Jews always looked upon David as an illegitimate child? But no! DHK will not even accept the possibility he could be wrong. Why would David write in a manner, or support any such notion in his Psalms that was a completely foreign notion to Rabbinical Judaism? Oh I know why DHK can have it no other way. He has a presupposition, an Augustinian dogma to support and will not have it any other way.

David was illegitimate? I have never heard of that. How did you come to that conclusion?

 

[steaver]

Perez, the son of Judah, was also illegitimate and he was in the lineage of David and Jesus. So being illigitimate does not affect being in the lineage of Christ.

I don't see Perez listed in Matthew. Where did you get this from?

 

[steaver]

Wasn't a prostitute listed in His lineage?

Give us a name.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

http://www.pinpointevangelism.com/l...alsin/Psalms_Fifty_One_Five-WilliamMurray.pdf

Amy, here is a link to an informative article on the subject of King David. It is not very long and well worth the read. :thumbsup:

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Does Rahab ring a bell? She may not be the only either.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Why not read the full psalm. It is not as poetic as you think.

HP: Think again. http://www.pinpointevangelism.com/l...alsin/Psalms_Fifty_One_Five-WilliamMurray.pdf

 

[DHK]

Yes many of us have read your posts carefully DHK.

This sounds like the post only a liberal would make, one denying some of the essentials of the Bible. I can hardly believe someone here would post it.

You need to take up something productive like fighting windmills. You put up your own paper ducks to shoot at. No one has ever stated David was ‘blaming’ his mother, or that Psalm 51 was not about his own personal sin.

That was not so apparent.

‘In sin did my mother conceive me’ are the words he used and you emphatically state that his mothers sin was not mentioned? Your blindness runs deep. The least one could admit is to the clear possibility he was in fact speaking of his mothers sin, not to blame her for his sin but rather to show that the sins of his mother indeed have a profound effect upon his life.

There is no possibility of your ridiculous allegations. As I said it sounds like something a liberal would post. This is a repentant king, not pointing to any sin of his mother but his own sin, his own sinful nature. It has nothing to do with his mother or supposed mother's sin, of which the Bible has no record. You are making up stories. Very sad. It is sad to see one tarnishing the reputation of God's anointed King and his family in a way that ought not to be. How low will people stoop.

His focus is clearly upon his mother in verse 5 when again he speaks of the influence of ones sin upon their posterity.

Because you don't understand the verse you malign the character of the one involved? That's terrible. It is a psalm of repentance; not of "attack my mother." How cruel can you be in your interpretation.

Of a truth, sin influences ones posterity. I have seen it in the lives of some I know intimately. I have seen it in my own life as well, sad to say. When one couple I knew divorced, five of their children have either divorced or had serious marriage issues. It is obvious to anyone that knows this family that divorce and problems so often breed divorce and problems.

Those things are true, but this is a psalm of repentance for the things that David did, not the things that his mother did. You can't even keep things in focus. You can't keep the context straight.

We see it our society over all. There is nothing strange in the least with David mentioning the effects of the sin of others example having a profound effect on his life as well.

David is speaking of his sin before God. This has nothing to do with his mother, her sin, or with Billy-the-Kid, and whoever else you may want to throw into this psalm. Make up stories if you wish. This psalm has to do with David and God, and that is all. End of story. It has nothing to do with David's relatives, not even his mother.

Explain David’s half sisters DHK. Who was their father according to Scripture? Why did Jesse not bring one particular son “David’ when he was told by the prophet to bring ‘all’ his sons and that one would be anointed as a future king?

Even a child knows the answer to this simple question. David was out keeping the sheep. He was not at home. That is the first reason. Secondly, he was the youngest. It is proper, cultural, and even according to the law, that the eldest should be first in line for any inheritance. The youngest of all his children would have been the furthest thing from Jesse's mind. Third, David was not even a full grown man. He was a teen-ager (maybe 17 or 18), hardly fit to be anointed the King of Israel in his father's eyes or in the eyes of all of his brothers. Why even call him? It didn't make any logical sense. He was just doing what his father had told him to do.

That is not some isolated incident, but a preponderance of evidence David was in fact an illegitimate child.

I don't find that in Scripture. What I do find is that David was exalted above all his brethren. You have swallowed the liberal lie.

Why is it said that the Jews always looked upon David as an illegitimate child?

Again you swallow the liberal lie, and do not back up this statement with any evidence.

But no! DHK will not even accept the possibility he could be wrong. Why would David write in a manner, or support any such notion in his Psalms that was a completely foreign notion to Rabbinical Judaism?

Rabbinical Judaism taught that if a Jew passed in front of a Rabbi and sneezed that the Jew would be cursed. They didn't teach the Word; they taught the commadments of men, and Christ soundly condemned them for it.

Oh I know why DHK can have it no other way. He has a presupposition, an Augustinian dogma to support and will not have it any other way.

I teach what the Word of God teaches. I have not read Augustine; don't know much of what he teaches and am not associated with him in any way. So why the false accusation? If you can't accept Biblical doctrine maybe you should join some other religion? Give it some thought anyway. But don't cast aspersions on me.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: Even a child knows the answer to this simple question. David was out keeping the sheep. He was not at home. That is the first reason

.

HP: I am certain they all had work to do, but was keeping the sheep more important than obedience to the prophet and crowning one of his sons as the future King of Israel??? Obviously some one else could have kept them because they certainly did when the prophet specifically told them to bring David to him.

DHK: Secondly, he was the youngest. It is proper, cultural, and even according to the law, that the eldest should be first in line for any inheritance. The youngest of all his children would have been the furthest thing from Jesse's mind.

HP: Jesse had been given a specific assignment by the prophet of God, and he failed to do so. It was not the furthest thing from Jesse’s mind. I say it was at the forefront of his mind when and why he intentionally left David at home.

 

[steaver]

Does Rahab ring a bell? She may not be the only either.

Rahab is not listed in Matthew's recorded lineage for Jesus. Are you sure you have the right name?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Yep. Rahab the harlot.

 

[DHK]

.

HP: I am certain they all had work to do, but was keeping the sheep more important than obedience to the prophet and crowning one of his sons as the future King of Israel??? Obviously some one else could have kept them because they certainly did when the prophet specifically told them to bring David to him.

HP: Jesse certainly had a lot of sons to be just a seventeen year old boy. :smilewinkgrin:

Thanks for alerting me to my typo. I have gone back and corrected it.

 

[steaver]

Yep. Rahab the harlot.

What scripture are you looking at?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

I am not looking at any Scripture right now. I am digging deep into the recesses of the mind at the moment slips as to where that reference is. I will find it for you, unless some other kind soul could find it first. You have to go back and see who was in David's heritage. There you will find Rahab the harlot.

 

[drfuss]

Rahab is not listed in Matthew's recorded lineage for Jesus. Are you sure you have the right name?

See Matthew 1:5

 

[steaver]

See Matthew 1:5

My bible says Rachab. Can you show how this is Rahab for me?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Steaver, I may be in trouble. My wife disagrees with me. :tonofbricks: