What Constitutes a Depraved Nature?

[Marcia]

Marcia, pertaining to your list of ‘scriptures’ concerning Psalms 51:5:

There has been a never ending stream of versions subsequent to the discovery of the famous Westcot Hort text. I believe it can be said with fairness that practically every modern day version we have seen evolve is either as a direct result of that corrupt text or that ‘discoverers’ of that text had a misappropriate influence upon the other subsequent translations. It does not take a brain surgeon to see the influence of established dogma in their interpretation of that text. I wouldn’t give you a plug nickel for the whole lot of them. You can quote me on that.

Are you KJO??

The KJ was quoted there too:

Behold, I was shapen
<02342> (8797)
in iniquity
<05771>_;
and in sin
<02399>
did my mother
<0517>
conceive
<03179> (8765)
me. {conceive

 

[DHK]

That really was a strange post for HP, Marcia.
Westcott and Hort's work was putting together an eclectic Greek NT which was made up mostly of two MSS: Vaticanus and Siniaticus.

It had nothing to do with the OT. In fact there was very little textual variation within the OT, and certainly not in the verses that we are discussing.

 

[trustitl]

The verse teaches that we are "estranged from God" that is separated from God, the minute we are born.

I have agreed with that statement. I just don't agree that estranged means guilty. You cannot accept that because you think the following:

The definition of death in the Bible is "separation"--all the time. It has no other meaning. An infant is born spiritually dead. Therefore he must be born again. He is born with a depraved nature or a sinful nature, dead in sin, dead and separated from God. He is not innocent. He is guilty before God.

Jesus said to the Pharisees: "You are of your father, the devil." News Flash: We are all born into the devil's family. Read Eph.2:1-3. We were never born in an innocent state. If that were so, then Jesus words: "You must be born again" would be totally meaningless.

You say we are born into the devil's family. I say this verse supports that our sin is the reason we are children of wrath. The following from your passage show why:

"Wherein in time past ye walked"

"children of disobedience"

"we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh"

An interesting note from Thayers Lexicon regarding "nature" in this passage offers the following usage:
"a mode of feeling and acting which by long habit has become nature" .

You must be born again, because you were born into the family of the god of this world.

The reason we must be born again is "Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." John 3:5-6

 

[trustitl]

The view is plain unscriptural and that is all. Give evidence from the Bible that any sin can be attached to the mother, when God blesses the marriage union. Your point there is ludicrous. God chose David, not because he was an illegitimate child (born in sin), but because he was a Godly man, and a suitable heir to throne of David, the ancestor of Christ. Being an illegitimate child would have disqualified him from that high and exalted place. There was no sin attached to his mother. David could not have inherited the throne if that was so--not with the blessing of Samuel and the anointing of God.

If you will read the post again I offered two choices of what the sin was referring to based on the way the sentence is written. The two choices were David's mother and the other was the world into which he was born. I said I think the sin is in relation to the world which is full of sin.

You either did not read the post or chose to comment on the one easiest to refute.

 

[DHK]

If you will read the post again I offered two choices of what the sin was referring to based on the way the sentence is written. The two choices were David's mother and the other was the world into which he was born. I said I think the sin is in relation to the world which is full of sin.

You either did not read the post or chose to comment on the one easiest to refute.

Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

OK, The reference can have nothing to do with the condition of his mother for then it would automatically disqualify him from inheriting "the throne of David."
Your preference "the sin is in relation to the world which is full of sin."
The problem there is there is no context for that interpretation, not in the verse, nor in the surrounding verses.
Verse 6 follows with the same theme as verse 5:

Psalms 51:6 Behold, thou desirest truth in the inward parts: and in the hidden part thou shalt make me to know wisdom.
--He again refers to "his inward parts," and the "hidden part" both of which are expressions that refer to the depraved nature that he has that needs to be cleansed. He desires truth, not wickedness and sin. It is a psalm of repentance. Thus it leads up to the cry of verse 7

Psalms 51:7 Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.
--What is being washed? It is the sin that was committed by his depraved nature or because of it. Had he no depraved nature he would have not committed such a grave sin, for he was "a man after God's own heart.

Now consider what the great preacher, Charles Haddon Spurgeon had to say concerning Psalm 51:5

Ver. 5. Behold, I was shapen in iniquity. He is thunderstruck at the discovery of his inbred sin, and
proceeds to set it forth. This was not intended to justify himself, but it rather meant to complete the
confession. It is as if he said, not only have I sinned this once, but I am in my very nature a sinner. The
fountain of my life is polluted as well as its streams. My birth tendencies are out of the square of
equity; I naturally lean to forbidden things. Mine is a constitutional disease, rendering my very person
obnoxious to thy wrath. And in sin did my mother conceive me. He goes back to the earliest
moment of his being, not to traduce his mother, but to acknowledge the deep tap roots of his sin. It is a
wicked wresting of Scripture to deny that original sin and natural depravity are here taught. Surely men
who cavil at this doctrine have need to be taught of the Holy Spirit what be the first principles of the
faith. David's mother was the Lord's handmaid, he was born in chaste wedlock, of a good father, and
he was himself, "the man after God's own heart;" and yet his nature was as fallen as that of any other
son of Adam, and there only needed the occasion for the manifesting of that sad fact. In our shaping
we were put out of shape, and when we were conceived our nature conceived sin. Alas, for poor
humanity! Those who will may cry it up, but he is most blessed who in his own soul has learned to
lament his lost estate.

 

[OldRegular]

The Second London Confession of Faith of 1689 states concerning the natural state of man [Lumpkin, page 264]:

“Man by his fall into a state of sin hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as a natural man, being altogether adverse from good, and dead in sin is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself; or to prepare himself thereunto.”

John Dagg [page 322, Manual of Theology] comments on the natural man’s inability regarding salvation, as follows:

“Every proposed method of salvation that leaves the issue dependent on human volition is defective. It has always been found that men will not come to Christ for life. The Gospel is preached to every creature; but all, with one consent, ask to be excused. The will of man must be changed; and this change the will cannot itself effect. Divine grace must here interpose. Unless God works in the sinner to will and to do, salvation is impossible.”

 

[trustitl]

Surely you knew I wouldn't agree with Spurgeon on this one.

As far as context I see a man confessing his sin, not anybody elses.

 

[DHK]

Surely you knew I wouldn't agree with Spurgeon on this one.

As far as context I see a man confessing his sin, not anybody elses.

Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

How do you get David confessing his sin out of this verse? I don't see David confessing any sin here.
But I do see David stating that he was born in a sinful condition, that is, referring to his sin nature.

 

[trustitl]

Here from the first 4 verses of Psalm 51 leading up to verse 5.

my transgressions

mine iniquity

my sin

my transgressions

my sin

I sinned

That is context! You should be embarrassed by the previous post.

 

[Marcia]

That really was a strange post for HP, Marcia.
Westcott and Hort's work was putting together an eclectic Greek NT which was made up mostly of two MSS: Vaticanus and Siniaticus.

It had nothing to do with the OT. In fact there was very little textual variation within the OT, and certainly not in the verses that we are discussing.

Yes, it was a strange post!

 

[Marcia]

Here from the first 4 verses of Psalm 51 leading up to verse 5.

my transgressions

mine iniquity

my sin

my transgressions

my sin

I sinned

That is context!

Ps 51 is David confessing his sin, but he also states that he was born a sinner.

 

[DHK]

Here from the first 4 verses of Psalm 51 leading up to verse 5.

my transgressions

mine iniquity

my sin

my transgressions

my sin

I sinned

That is context! You should be embarrassed by the previous post.

No embarrassment at all. In fact I will repeat the first part of it for you. I trust you will answer.

Psalms 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

How do you get David confessing his sin out of this verse?

By the way, just because you don't like a man, or care for his theology, (i.e., Spurgeon), doesn't mean you can't try and refute the Biblical points that he makes. It was a very good commentary on the verse.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Marcia: Are you KJO??

HP: Are you anti- the truth of the KJV? David said his mother conceived him in an act of sin.

Marcia: behold, I was shapen
<02342> (8797)
in iniquity
<05771>_;
and in sin
<02399>
did my mother
<0517>
conceive
<03179> (8765)
me. {conceive

HP: First, my comments were not directed to the words in the KJV, for I have full faith and confidence that it expresses the sentiments of the Author plainly. I accept the KJV as God’s Word to me. Take whatever version you so desire, just remember that the truth is not up for varied interpretations of different ideas from differing so-called translations. Our eternal life is at stake as a result of what is written and the way in which we apply those words to our life. As for me, I simply do not need or desire any other translation. The KJV of the Bible was the version of the greatest revival movement this nation has ever seen. It safely guided my great grandfather and grandmother, my grandfathers and grandmothers, and my own father and mother, my pastors and teachers from my youth up and will safely guide me and my household to our heavenly home with the help and guidance of the Holy Spirit. I have no confidence whatsoever in modern translations subsequent to the W&H text found in the trash bin of a monastery, nor any that would allow W&H to influence any other translations.

If you have confidence in the modern versions available today, fine. That is between you and God. I would warn you as I would any or all others, that I can think of little greater harm to the body of Christ and truth itself than the proliferation of modern translations. Eternity will either prove me right or wrong. I am willing to take that stand and stand there with full confidence that such knowledge was implanted in my heart by the Holy Spirit, and that I will be exonerated of all nay sayers for making that remark at the judgment bar of God.

All translation are NOT equally the Word of God, for God is not divided and all translations do NOT say the same things or convey the same meanings. Again, place your confidence wherever you so desire, but as for me, give me the KJV.

And yes, Scripture does say that David’s mother conceived him in sin and that does not take a rocket scientist or a modern day version to make plain to my heart and mind how that would be accomplished. It fits also very well with the other Scriptural reasons as well as the beliefs held by the Jews surrounding the conception of David, his two half sisters, his brothers hatred toward him, and the kindness showed to him by Nahash as I clearly set forth in a previous post. It also solidifies to my heart and mind the reality of our sins affecting directly the lives of others by influence and example. It behooves me to be careful not to lay a stumbling block in the paths of my posterity by my actions that could be an occasion or temptation/excuse for their yielding to sin as the sin of David’s mother evidently by this text proved to be in his own life.

God gave the people a translation in the KJV that can be read, distributed and copied at will without asking any man for permission to do so or give credit to any man when quoting it. You call me whatever your heart so desires, but I will keep my KJV without apologies or the slightest second thought. I trust it implicitly. I can find the Word of God translated in an understandable fashion in my language by the finest scholars ever assembled to undertake the task of translation using the best manuscripts, following the Majority text held and revered by the Church as accurate and trustworthy for centuries.

Do I desire or need the modern English versions? Thanks, but no thanks Marcia. The KJV with the help of the Holy Spirit will suffice to see me home.

PS: And in the vein of sentiments expressed so often by DHK concerning original sin, please, do not name call me with that KJVO label, for I have never been part of any such movement, and established my views sitting alone on an island just north of the island DHK sat on while developing his ideas of constitutional depravity.:smilewinkgrin:

 

[DHK]

God gave the people a translation in the KJV that can be read, distributed and copied at will without asking any man for permission to do so or give credit to any man when quoting it. You call me whatever your heart so desires, but I will keep my KJV without apologies or the slightest second thought. I trust it implicitly. I can find the Word of God translated in an understandable fashion in my language by the finest scholars ever assembled to undertake the task of translation using the best manuscripts, following the Majority text held and revered by the Church as accurate and trustworthy for centuries.

And if you lived in India and spoke only Hindi would you still be of the same opinion?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

TrustitL: Surely you knew I wouldn't agree with Spurgeon on this one.

As far as context I see a man confessing his sin, not anybody elses.

HP: We have little disagreement that I can see overall on this passage in Ps51:5.:thumbs:

I would just add this. The overall context of the chapter is in fact a confession of his own sin. That does not necessitate as we well know, that every verse speaks nothing of the sins of others. David was obviously not blaming his mother for his own sin, but was simply pleading to God that her sins in the act of his conception served as an influence or occasion for his own sins.

The lesson is clear. Our sins do have an impact on those around us, especially our children. Our sins can be used, right or wrong, as an excuse, and even to some degree a viable excuse to some limited degree, for our own sins. What I do can serve as a great influence in the lives of my children. Right or wrong we that have raised children as you and I and others on this list, know that children often do try in some measure to justify their actions by our sins or mistakes in our youth. We can say, and accurately so, there were some in our lives that by their influence and actions aided to opening and awakening the desire and occasion for sin in our own lives by their example and influence.

There is again nothing in the context of this Psalm, speaking and confessing ones own sins that would prohibit, or be the least bit unusual, not to mention the influences in ones life that lead to or had an impact upon their own sins. David was obviously no exception. He mentions plainly in verse 5 that the sins of his mother, enacted upon in the very act of his conception, did in fact impact his life in the sins he now was confessing. He does not dwell or blame his mother for his own sins, but rather merely mentions the fact in passing of the evil influence that her actions had upon his own decisions at least to some degree. Perhaps the Holy Spirit lead him to mention that fact concerning the sins of his mother in his conception to remind us as parents, that we are NOT an island to ourselves, and that our sins can have a very detrimental affect upon those around us, even the children we love.

Let me do some confessing of my own. There are sins in my life that I have repented for that I know for fact were influenced greatly by the actions of others in my childhood. I was awakened to influences far before I was able to deal with or understand the tremendous ramifications of such actions upon my life and served as evil influences and occasions for my own sin. Yes, I repented for those sins, for regardless of the influences that prevailed in my life and the individuals involved, at the age of accountability when I did understand the intrinsic value of God’s commands, I willingly, without force or coercion continued on in that selfish sinful path.

I doubt that there is an honest soul on this board that was not influenced to sin by the actions of those around them in childhood, even by their own parents in some instances. Often like mother like daughter, like father like son.

Let there be no mistake. Do not error in this matter. I am confessing my personal sins, and the context of this and the last paragraph is indeed the confession of my own personal sins, but nothing necessitates that I do not mention the influences and occasions by others to those personal and voluntary sins that I committed. Psalms 51 is no exception.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

DHK: And if you lived in India and spoke only Hindi would you still be of the same opinion?

HP: I wonder often of the devastating impact false theology can have, yes even perpetrated via translations of Scripture into foreign languages, upon those that read them. I am certain that if ones heart is honestly set upon obedience to God that God will make a way in spite of any and all influences to the contrary.

God is Just. He will not hold one accountable for that which they had no way of knowing differently, but will judge every man and women in relationship to that which they in fact do know and in accordance to the light that they have had available to them.

 

[Marcia]

HP: Are you anti- the truth of the KJV? David said his mother conceived him in an act of sin.

It says that he was sinful from conception. The KJV has old-fashioned language from the 17th century. Also, the KVJ says "I was shapen in iniquity." Everyone who reads the Hebrew translates this as David saying he was born a sinner.

HP: I wonder often of the devastating impact false theology can have, yes even perpetrated via translations of Scripture into foreign languages, upon those that read them. I am certain that if ones heart is honestly set upon obedience to God that God will make a way in spite of any and all influences to the contrary.

God is Just. He will not hold one accountable for that which they had no way of knowing differently, but will judge every man and women in relationship to that which they in fact do know and in accordance to the light that they have had available to them.

If you think only the KJV is God's word, then I am through discussing this with you. That is a mindset I don't waste my time on.

 

[DHK]

HP: I wonder often of the devastating impact false theology can have, yes even perpetrated via translations of Scripture into foreign languages, upon those that read them. I am certain that if ones heart is honestly set upon obedience to God that God will make a way in spite of any and all influences to the contrary.

God is Just. He will not hold one accountable for that which they had no way of knowing differently, but will judge every man and women in relationship to that which they in fact do know and in accordance to the light that they have had available to them.

Here are the facts.
There are still some linguistic groups or ethnic tribes or nations that have no translation of the Bible whatsoever.
Very few nations in the world have a Bible translated from the TR or that comes from the Majority Text.
Those Bibles which have been disseminated from the British Foreign Bible Society and all of its many branches have been translated into many different languages throughout the world using the Critical Text.
The Wycliffe Translators inspite of the wonderful work that they do, translate from the Critical Text.
More than 90 percent of the world not using an English Bible uses a Bible that you would consider a modern version--non-KJV or from the Critical Text.

The KJVO group would say that these people do not have the Word of God. To take that position is ludicrous. They have the Word of God as much as you do. We are all commanded to study to show ourselves approved unto God, and that includes other nations as well. The differences between most accurate translations of mv's and the KJV is very little, and affects no major doctrine whatsoever. There are over 5000 manuscripts of the NT. In 95-99% of these there is agreement. You cannot tell a person in another nation with another Bible that they do not have the Word of God. That would be a most shameful thing to do, and entirely wrong.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Marcia: Everyone who reads the Hebrew translates this as David saying he was born a sinner.

HP: Now that is quite a statement. Is that hearsay, conjecture, a mere opinion of yours, or can you prove that by evidence?



Meet Alfred Edersheim, one of the foremost recognized scholars of Jewish antiquity, writings, life, practices, and doctrines. :wavey:

 

[Marcia]

HP: Now that is quite a statement. Is that hearsay, conjecture, a mere opinion of yours, or can you prove that by evidence?

Well, I said I was through on this topic, but since this is a short question...Read all the renderings of the Hebrew! They are all looking at the Hebrew when they write out the English.

Either one is born regenerate and never needs regeneration/salvation, or one is born unregenerate and needs salvation. It has to be one or the other. There is no halfway state.