• 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!

The Implications of Original Sin

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
These scriptures have absolutely nothing to do with your own personal righteousness or own personal condition on earth.

1 John 3:7
Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as He is righteous.

Again, you are confusing the PERFECT SINLESS IMPUTED righteousness of Christ with imparted incomplete progressive righteousness worked out in your own life by the power of the Indwelling Spirit of God.

The first describes Christ's own personal righteousness that CAN NEVER BE LESS THAN SINLESS - PERFECT and COMPLETE - nothing ADDED nothing SUBTRACTED but always TOTALL SUFFIENENT.

That is not true in regard to the righteousness of 1 Jn. 3:7! This is about righteousness found in your OWN Life, a life that is NEVER SINLESS, NEVER COMPLETED here and now and which can be ADDED unto and SUBTRACTED from in regard to righteousness.
 
Plain n simple: When I repent and ask Him for forgiveness of my sins, He forgives me, and forgets.

If my sins are forgiven and forgotten, I am sinless.
HP: I sure like the way you put things in a simple but Scriptural manner.:thumbs:
 

plain_n_simple

Active Member
Again, you are confusing the PERFECT SINLESS IMPUTED righteousness of Christ with imparted incomplete progressive righteousness worked out in your own life by the power of the Indwelling Spirit of God.

The first describes Christ's own personal righteousness that CAN NEVER BE LESS THAN SINLESS - PERFECT and COMPLETE - nothing ADDED nothing SUBTRACTED but always TOTALL SUFFIENENT.

That is not true in regard to the righteousness of 1 Jn. 3:7! This is about righteousness found in your OWN Life, a life that is NEVER SINLESS, NEVER COMPLETED here and now and which can be ADDED unto and SUBTRACTED from in regard to righteousness.

You seem to think there are two or more types of righteousness.
 

plain_n_simple

Active Member
Thanks HP and to God for making me simple, I used to be a scripture grenade thrower lol, til He told me about that child like faith.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You seem to think there are two or more types of righteousness.

My friend there is! There is the personal righteousness of Christ IMPUTED to you as a complete and finished and all sufficient rightouness by faith whereby you are justified before God at the moment you believe in Christ.

Then, there is the righteousnes of Christ created in you your inward man (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10) called REGENERATION but is GRADUALLY and PROGRESSIVELY IMPARTED (not imputed) by the Holy Spirit into your own personal life called sanctification!

The former has to do with Christ's own Personal righteousness imputed to you before God in heaven but the latter has to do with your own personal CONDITION on earth as it is progressively worked out by Christ.

The former is FINISHED and COMPLETE and SUFFICIENT while the latter is a unfinished, incompleted, insufficient and therfore continuing PROGRESS!

Confusing these two realities is the difference between understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ and "another gospel"! It is the differnence between heaven and hell. A saved person can be led astray and you are led astray on this topic but anyone who believes that their own unfinished, incomplete, insufficient always progressive righteous life obtains justification before God and entrance into heaven has embraced "another gospel" and is rejecting the finished work of Jesus Christ as unfinished, incomplete and therefore not sufficient.
 

plain_n_simple

Active Member
My friend there is! There is the personal righteousness of Christ IMPUTED to you as a complete and finished and all sufficient rightouness by faith whereby you are justified before God at the moment you believe in Christ.

Then, there is the righteousnes of Christ created in you your inward man (Eph. 4:24; Col. 3:10) called REGENERATION but is GRADUALLY and PROGRESSIVELY IMPARTED (not imputed) by the Holy Spirit into your own personal life called sanctification!

The former has to do with Christ's own Personal righteousness imputed to you before God in heaven but the latter has to do with your own personal CONDITION on earth as it is progressively worked out by Christ.

The former is FINISHED and COMPLETE and SUFFICIENT while the latter is a unfinished, incompleted, insufficient and therfore continuing PROGRESS!

Confusing these two realities is the difference between understanding the gospel of Jesus Christ and "another gospel"! It is the differnence between heaven and hell. A saved person can be led astray and you are led astray on this topic but anyone who believes that their own unfinished, incomplete, insufficient always progressive righteous life obtains justification before God and entrance into heaven has embraced "another gospel" and is rejecting the finished work of Jesus Christ as unfinished, incomplete and therefore not sufficient.

Nah, righteous is righteous. If you want to walk around thinking you are still a sinner, so be it. This should be a new thread.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Nah, righteous is righteous. If you want to walk around thinking you are still a sinner, so be it. This should be a new thread.

If you think your life is as righteous as Christ you are sorely deceived but that is exactly what you are teaching!

Our own righteousnessess NEVER equal the glory of God but ALWAYS come short of the glory of God - ALWAYS and thus we are sinners AT ALL TIMES by omission. Jesus never came short and never transgressed.

Do you at this present moment love the Lord thy God with ALL thine heart and ALL thy mind, soul and strength??? If you say yes you are a liar! All that we do as righteous is God working in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure! It is by grace. That work is progressive, here and there but not continuous and not without intermittant sin. The Righteousness of Christ was not here and there or intermittantly spotted with sin - don't fool yourself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

glfredrick

New Member
1 John 1:8-10 (KJV)
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. [9] If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. [10] If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.


John wrote to believers...
 

plain_n_simple

Active Member
If you think your life is as righteous as Christ you are sorely deceived but that is exactly what you are teaching!

Our own righteousnessess NEVER equal the glory of God but ALWAYS come short of the glory of God - ALWAYS and thus we are sinners AT ALL TIMES by omission. Jesus never came short and never transgressed.

Do you at this present moment love the Lord thy God with ALL thine heart and ALL thy mind, soul and strength??? If you say yes you are a liar! All that we do as righteous is God working in us both to will and to do of His good pleasure! It is by grace. That work is progressive, here and there but not continuous and not without intermittant sin. The Righteousness of Christ was not here and there or intermittantly spotted with sin - don't fool yourself.

If you say so.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
If you say so.

Do you say so? Do you claim that all your waking hours you love God with 100% of your heart, soul, mind and strength??? Is that your testimony? That was the testimony of Christ - "I ALWAYS do what pleases the Father"!

Is that your righteousness as well in regard to your own person?
 
Biblicist: Do you say so? Do you claim that all your waking hours you love God with 100% of your heart, soul, mind and strength??? Is that your testimony? That was the testimony of Christ - "I ALWAYS do what pleases the Father"!


HP: Your comments sound in like manner as those that accused Job. God may well have a thing to say to you concerning your accusatory questions in the end.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter


HP: Your comments sound in like manner as those that accused Job. God may well have a thing to say to you concerning your accusatory questions in the end.

Only an absolute fool would claim equality with Christ's words "I ALWAYS do that which pleases the Father." However, that is precisely the righteousness of God by the definition of God's Law.

Job made no such claim! He was "perfect" in the sense of maturity but not in the sense of sinless perfection.
 

Jerry Shugart

New Member
God created the body without sin and God created the soul of man without sin. Hence, God would be a cruel taskmaster to pass the condemnation down to infants since they commit no responsible act of willful sin.
You and the Calvinists say that the guilt of Adam's sin is imputed to all of mankind:

"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).

If you are right then we must believe that both Cain and Abel bore the iniquity of their Father Adam. However, the Scriptures tells us that that will never happen:

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son"
(Ez.18:20).
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
You and the Calvinists say that the guilt of Adam's sin is imputed to all of mankind:

"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).

If you are right then we must believe that both Cain and Abel bore the iniquity of their Father Adam. However, the Scriptures tells us that that will never happen:

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son"
(Ez.18:20).

Again, your whole argument is based upon the presumption that "a father" could be used interchangably in Romans 5:12-19 with "Adam."

Your whole argument is based upon the presumption that every "father" stands in relationship to his own children as Adam did to the whole human race!

Don't you think that is a pretty stupid presumption?
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Quote:
Secondly, DHK assumes without proof that all me have the opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel.
I gave you Scripture, and as I predicted, you would not even believe the Word of God. That's sad.
God is not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.
It is God's will that all should be saved. (1Tim.2:4)
He is the propitiation not for our sins only but for the sins of the whole world (1John 2:2)
--With these Scriptures in mind don't you think he would provide a way for all men to hear the gospel if they so desired to hear it? But believe what you like. Your tendency on this board is to believe a man-made philosophy without any Scriptural backing at all, as you have proven over and over again.
HP: To extrapolate the rendering of this verse to suggest that every living human being has had the opportunity to hear and accept the gospel message, is beyond all reason.
Just another admission that you won't believe the Bible. What it says, it says.
It has not happened.
Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
If you really believed these verses you would put down your keyboard immediately, go, prepare to be a missionary, and go to the most needy nations on the face of this earth so that they may hear. But you don't even believe the Scripture that you read. Don't be a hypocrite. At least I believe the Scripture and act on it.
I see your position as simply unreasonable and unbelievable violating common sense, the testimony of missionaries across the globe,obviously yourself excluded, and not reasonably supported by the one solitary proof text you set forth to support such a notion. Show us your support for such a notion by any Bible scholar
I could show you my support via my own experience as a missionary and the testimony of every other missionary I know. You don't know what you are talking about. Like I said, if you really believed the Scripture you wrote, you would drop what you have, prepare to be a missionary and go to the neediest places on this earth and there preach the gospel. But you don't believe in the very Scriptures you believe.
Who has the unreasonable position? You do! You don't even believe in the Great Commission! I carry it out.
. Look back to the OT and apply such a notion as you suggest to the fact that salvation was given to the Jews. The words of Christ Himself clearly refute your position.
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
John 1:10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
Joh 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
Your Scripture is taken out of context. This was all pre-cross.
Now Christ has died, buried, and risen again. He was rejected by the nation of Israel, who crucified him. salvation has been offered to all the world. Whosoever believes on him shall be saved. Have you done that?
I completely understand why DHK insists on suggesting that having the opportunity to respond to the gospel, because he knows intuitively that if men are born in sin and have not such an opportunity, it would prove God unjust if He condemned all men when they had no other choice but to be the sinners original sin makes them. DHK's notion is convenient cover for an unscriptural notion of OS.
Where do you get such deluded ideas?
Man was born in sin. Jesus died for the sins of the world. He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. Did he die in vain? No. The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. Does HP believe the Bible on this point? No. Does man have a choice to believe Christ as Saviour? Yes. Is there more than one way to heaven? No.

What did Christ say?
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (John 3:36)
--Does it get any plainer?
HP apparently does not believe the Bible on this point.
Whether you believe the unscriptural notion that men are not born in sin (as HP does), or believe that men have a sin nature, as the Bible teaches, this truth remains the same--the only way to heaven is through Christ. There is no other way. "I am the way the truth and the life," Jesus said, "No man comes unto the Father but by me." HP do you believe the Bible?
DHK indicate that I am not correct on the following comment I made:
If you think that is what I believe then quote me. I never said that.
If original sin is correct, one does in fact have the driving force of sin and coercion in ones life, which makes it impossible to choose the right.
That is not my belief. That is a typical Calvinistic belief, but it is not mine.
If the will itself is so affected by sin that it can only sin and that continually, no morality can be predicated of it period, for morality necessitates the clear possibility of contrary choice. OS necessitates that contrary choice is not available.
You quote a position that is not mine and build a case on something that I don't believe. What foolishness is this?
I believe I am completely correct in my assessment above concerning DHK's philosophy. If DHK thinks I am wrong, I say it is a direct result of a clear inconsistency in his belief system that he needs to address.
You are wrong. I have said many times what I believe. You are confused.
Again, if OS is accepted as fact, one has no choice but to sin.
You are so confused. This is truly sad.
If one has a choice to accept or reject, that would in reality be the only moral choice a sinner could every make, all other ends being necessitated by ones sinful nature.
We all have that choice. We all have a sin nature.
Of a truth, words have meanings. If one uses the word moral, or morality, certain facts apply. Morality always denotes clear choice. Not choice to simply 'do as one wills' for the 'doing' sustains to the will the notion of necessity, not freedom or choice. One can ONLY do as they will. If one acts differently than the will chooses, it is a clear indication that the will has chosen a different end.
If you wish to murder, go ahead. You will be accountable. That is true for one who is saved or one who is not saved. Moses murdered a man, and was held accountable. So did David, a man after God's own heart. They were both held accountable. They were both saved men. God stated that Lot was a just and righteous man. Lot offered his two virgin daughters to a crowd of homosexuals to be abused by them all night long. If that had happened they would have been dead by morning. Yet Lot was a just and righteous man. Then Lot escaped out of the city, went to a mountain and committed incest with his two daughters. Yet, Lot was a just and righteous man. He made these decisions of his own accord. God did not force his hand.
One other related issue DHK brings to the forefront in his beliefs, is a long held Calvinistic notion that the damning sin is 'not accepting the gospel.' Certain there is one solitary proof text those that hold to such a notion go, but that in no wise makes the case for them. Scripture is clear. It is ones sins that separate one from God. Legion are the passages that set that fact in clear plain light. For brevity alone I mention just one.
Isa 59:2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.
Written to the nation of Israel, sin had separated from fellowship with God. They were God's chosen nation. This was not speaking of salvation as such. These were God's chosen people.
The rejection of the offer of salvation will certainly seal ones fate IF they have the opportunity to hear and respond to the gospel, but that is not their damning sin. Disobedience to any known commandment of God is a damning sin, even if that simply involves eating a forbidden fruit and for that they deserve eternal separation from God, and for their sins will they stand condemned before a Holy and Just God.
Rejection of Christ, and rejection of Christ alone will damn a person to hell.

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. (John 3:36)

But you don't believe the Bible, do you?
 

savedbymercy

New Member
dhk

Quote:

Isa 59:2 But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear.

Written to the nation of Israel, sin had separated from fellowship with God. They were God's chosen nation. This was not speaking of salvation as such. These were God's chosen people.

Only a remnant of that Nation was God's Chosen People !
 

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
dhk

Only a remnant of that Nation was God's Chosen People !
It doesn't matter what the consequences were.
Jehovah spoke to "my people," the nation of Israel.
Election has nothing to do with this. Sin separated the nation of Israel from Jehovah at this point. They needed to be reconciled back to God, or judgment would come upon them. And judgment did. They went into captivity shortly after that.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Three FACTS that deny your interpretation of Heb. 2:17

1. Pre-fallen Adam was fully human in nature - FACT

2. Post-fallen Adam was fully human in nature - FACT

3. Therefore the presence or absence of sin has NOTHING to do with being make like his brethren in all things pertaining to human nature - FACT
 


Biblicist: 1. Pre-fallen Adam was fully human in nature - FACT


HP: Absolute, a nature influenced by perfect sensibilities.

Biblicist: 2. Post-fallen Adam was fully human in nature - FACT


HP: Absolutely yet with depraved sensibilities and as such a greater tendency or inclination, or proclivity to selfishness and sin.

Biblicist: 3. Therefore the presence or absence of sin has NOTHING to do with being make like his brethren in all things pertaining to human nature - FACT

HP: That is not a fact neither do your first two remarks prove it to be a corect deduction. He was not made like unto Adam of old, but rather like unto His brethren of the post -fall era with depraved natu was at birth, but rather like unto His brethren born with depraved natural sensibilities and propensities.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter



HP: Absolute, a nature influenced by perfect sensibilities.


We are not talking about what may or may not influence human nature but what is essential to be human in nature! There are many things that may influence human nature for good or for bad but the influences are not essential to be human in nature.




HP: Absolutely yet with depraved sensibilities and as such a greater tendency or inclination, or proclivity to selfishness and sin.

Regardless if the sensibilites are influenced for good or for bad does not define what is essential to be human in nature. If human nature was influenced by good sensibilities and a greater tendency or inclination, or proclivity to goodness and righteousness that would in no way redefine what is essential to be human in nature. Was this not the case before the fall????? Hence, alternative infuences are not essential to be human in nature.



HP: That is not a fact neither do your first two remarks prove it to be a corect deduction. He was not made like unto Adam of old, but rather like unto His brethren of the post -fall era with depraved natu was at birth, but rather like unto His brethren born with depraved natural sensibilities and propensities.

It is not a fact in your mind because you have made the oxymoronic conclusion that influences are essential to be human in nature when they are not! If you simply changed the foundational influence to be "good" as it was before the fall, then it is obvious that Adam was 100% human in nature after the fall as he was before the fall.

Hebrews 2:17 only demands that Christ be 100% human in nature rather than angelic in nature or some other nature. Since Humanity was created without sin directly from God and since Christ was conceived directly from God then he too would be without sin as Adam and thus qualify him to be the "Last Adam."

The fact that he is compared to Adam in regard to Adams actions that affected many demands he is being compared to Adam's responsibility PRIOR to the fall rather than AFTER the fall. In order for Christ to be the "Last Adam" he must come into the world at least EQUAL to how Adam came into the world or else he cannot properly be the "Last" or "second" Adam. Think about it!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top