Does my post not try to cover that?
We are dead in (1) trespasses and (2) sins.
How are we dead in both?
Someone opened this can or worms, let's dig around in it.
-
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!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
What is your "theory of sin?"
- Thread starter Alcott
- Start date
Does my post not try to cover that?
We are dead in (1) trespasses and (2) sins.
How are we dead in both?
Someone opened this can or worms, let's dig around in it.
actually, Law not given until Moses....
Once again see my post.
A lot of scripture in it maybe right maybe wrong. Kick it around.
"Anything that violates applicable scripture, as I understand it"?
As you said, "Sin is anything man does that is not done by faith," faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God [scripture, supposedly]. So isn't that doing things by faith by understanding the scriptures? If so, why could you not vote for the option: "Anything that violates applicable scripture, as I understand it"? [You said the correct answer is not in the list. How is that is not the right one-- actually the "best" one, as I described the poll-- for you?]
Sorry I am not understanding your question. Can you rephrase it or perhaps expand on it and I will try and answer it.?
As you said, "Sin is anything man does that is not done by faith," faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God [scripture, supposedly]. So isn't that doing things by faith by understanding the scriptures? If so, why could you not vote for the option: "Anything that violates applicable scripture, as I understand it"? [You said the correct answer is not in the list. How is that is not the right one-- actually the "best" one, as I described the poll-- for you?]
freeatlast
New Member
"Anything that violates applicable scripture, as I understand it"?
As you said, "Sin is anything man does that is not done by faith," faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God [scripture, supposedly]. So isn't that doing things by faith by understanding the scriptures? If so, why could you not vote for the option: "Anything that violates applicable scripture, as I understand it"? [You said the correct answer is not in the list. How is that is not the right one-- actually the "best" one, as I described the poll-- for you?]
[SIZE=+0]Because that is not what scripture says. It is not faith because I believe it. It is only faith when I believe what scripture is intending by what it says. If I believe something to mean something different then what scripture intended it is not faith it is error in the mist of my improper understanding.
For instance if I believe it is sin to eat pork and I eat, it is sin for me because I ate without faith since the bible teaches we can eat pork but I ate doubting. However if I believe it is a sin to eat pork and do not eat pork because of that belief I am not credited for refusing not to eat because of faith. I am not eating because of error. To have faith on the matter of eating I have to accept with a clear conscience that eating pork is permitted based on scripture.
The same with all things. If what I do cannot be done by faith which has to come from scripture then it is sin. Many people believe falsely with a clear conscience but it is not faith they are believing with.
[/SIZE]
Last edited by a moderator:
Hello Percho, I will just make a few comments, don't know that it will be "help," though...lol.
As I said...lol. This might be lengthy, but remember, you asked for "help."
I would ask that you provide a verse that specifically state that "all men born of women are dead in trespasses and sins."
This would in fact include Christ, would it not? And we know that is not the case.
Here are two specific matches to that phrase, so if you have a particular verse in mind, I would greatly appreciate it if you would post it.
You see, I have found, so far, that only of Christ is the phrase "made of a woman" used.
If you can provide this verse, I will have to drop this point from my defense of the deity of Christ.
I think you are saying here a specific "except Jesus," but I do think the previous statement could be cleared up a little.
Here, if we put these two thoughts together, we include Christ with humanity in a way that scripture does not, which makes Christ "separate from sinners," and in effect makes the "except" irrelevant.
Christ was born in the Age of Law. Some view this as possibly a reference to the Law's involvement, when the reverse is true. Christ utilized the law. The law was under Christ, subjected to His will. Because it came into being by God.
No need to limit sin to any particular transgression of God's will.
1 Samuel 15:23
King James Version (KJV)
23For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
I view rejection of God's word as sin, and encompasses all rejection of God's will, even as Adam did.
I see no need to distinguish these as two separate acts. We can see that in how this word is used:
Romans 4:25
King James Version (KJV)
25Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
John said, Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
See here for the New Testament usage of trespasses.
It would be of interest to also look at the root word.
Be back in a bit.
I have a "theory" howbeit not totally formulated. Help Please.
As I said...lol. This might be lengthy, but remember, you asked for "help."
Gal 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, Eph 2:1 And you, who were dead in trespasses and sins; (Now that is written to you however are not all men born of women dead in trespasses and sins per verse from Gal 3:22?)
I would ask that you provide a verse that specifically state that "all men born of women are dead in trespasses and sins."
This would in fact include Christ, would it not? And we know that is not the case.
Here are two specific matches to that phrase, so if you have a particular verse in mind, I would greatly appreciate it if you would post it.
You see, I have found, so far, that only of Christ is the phrase "made of a woman" used.
If you can provide this verse, I will have to drop this point from my defense of the deity of Christ.
(Born of woman = [except Jesus and even he was made of woman
I think you are saying here a specific "except Jesus," but I do think the previous statement could be cleared up a little.
Here, if we put these two thoughts together, we include Christ with humanity in a way that scripture does not, which makes Christ "separate from sinners," and in effect makes the "except" irrelevant.
made under the law, yet without sin]).
Christ was born in the Age of Law. Some view this as possibly a reference to the Law's involvement, when the reverse is true. Christ utilized the law. The law was under Christ, subjected to His will. Because it came into being by God.
(Dead in trespasses and sins.) = 1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.
No need to limit sin to any particular transgression of God's will.
1 Samuel 15:23
King James Version (KJV)
23For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.
I view rejection of God's word as sin, and encompasses all rejection of God's will, even as Adam did.
(If sin is the transgression of the law, what are trespasses?
I see no need to distinguish these as two separate acts. We can see that in how this word is used:
Romans 4:25
King James Version (KJV)
25Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
John said, Behold, the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
See here for the New Testament usage of trespasses.
It would be of interest to also look at the root word.
Be back in a bit.
Jameison-Faussett-Brown Commentary quotes BENGEL, refers "trespasses" to the Jews who had the law, and yet revolted from it; "sins," to the Gentiles who know not God. Google Johann (John) Bengel
I believe Bengel has it backward being the law was given to Israel their sins would have been to transgress the law and to others "trespasses" would apply. compare the following.)
I think the translators were apt in their translation, and it carries over to the modern meaning of the word very well, trespasses having a connotation of "going somewhere one should not."
That sin and trespasses speak of one general concept, sin, and that it applies to all men can be seen here:
Trespasses and sins (Jews)
Romans 11:12
King James Version (KJV)
12Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?
...trespasses.
Matthew 3:6
King James Version (KJV)
6And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.
...sins.
Trespasses and sins (Gentiles)
Colossians 2:13
King James Version (KJV)
13And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;
...trespasses.
Ephesians 2
1And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
And actually here...trespasses and sins.
So I would suggest that distinguishing between the two is not necessary.
Be back in a bit.
And I will have to rush through these, Percho, as I need to be going.
Not too often this is brought up (under sin being in dying they will surely be dead, dying thou dost die Gen. 2:17), pretty cool, though.
The correlation between eating the flesh of Christ and life is there, but it is good to distinguish, as Christ did, between the physical life which "Moses did not give" and the spiritual life which Christ came to give to fallen man. He came that man might have the life of God. Similarly the trees and vegetation were for physical life, even as they are now.
Agreed. I am one that believes that Christ here does in fact prophesy of the life man would receive...after He died. The life of God in man can best be seen, in my view, as beginning at Pentecost, when the Comforter was given to man.
But we have to be careful, I feel, to distinguish between spiritual and physical life. It is generally held that Adam did die "the day he ate of the tree," that is, spiritually. I believe that.
Even in the story of Lazarus and the rich man, we see that they died physically, but did not cease to exist, which could be viewed as a form of life, even spiritual, though one would be hard pressed to insist that they (even Lazarus) had the life of God.
In the New Heaven and earth, there will be a tree of life(two of them maybe...they are on both sides of the river...lol), said to be for the "healing" of the nations (which I feel probably points to man restored to his former condition rather than "if we get hurt...eat of the leaves").
What is good to consider is that the residents gained eternal life before entrance to the eternal state. Not only that, I would suggest that eternal life, the life of God, does not, and never has come from any source other than God Himself.
It seems reasonable to conclude that eternal life will not be sustained by the tree, as well as to conclude that eternal life was or would not have been sustained in the Garden.
This points the issue of Adam's separation from God, not the tree or the garden.
And this was the point, primarily, I hoped to be able to offer something to consider on. Again, you asked for "help," hope that qualifies.
Be back in a bit.
Romans 5:12-14 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: For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned (in trespasses) from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. (As Gal. 3:22 states) But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, (under sin being in dying they will surely be dead, dying thou dost die Gen. 2:17)
Not too often this is brought up (under sin being in dying they will surely be dead, dying thou dost die Gen. 2:17), pretty cool, though.
(In Gen 1:29,30 before trespasses and sin we learn God gave to man herb seed and tree seed for food and beast herb seed for food. I show this because of what Old Union Brother posted from Rom 14:23 concerning eating of faith. I believe to eat of faith is the same as Jesus spoke of in John 6.)
John 6:53-57 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is meat (food) indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
The correlation between eating the flesh of Christ and life is there, but it is good to distinguish, as Christ did, between the physical life which "Moses did not give" and the spiritual life which Christ came to give to fallen man. He came that man might have the life of God. Similarly the trees and vegetation were for physical life, even as they are now.
(A prophesy)
Agreed. I am one that believes that Christ here does in fact prophesy of the life man would receive...after He died. The life of God in man can best be seen, in my view, as beginning at Pentecost, when the Comforter was given to man.
(Death and Life are related to eating.
But we have to be careful, I feel, to distinguish between spiritual and physical life. It is generally held that Adam did die "the day he ate of the tree," that is, spiritually. I believe that.
Even in the story of Lazarus and the rich man, we see that they died physically, but did not cease to exist, which could be viewed as a form of life, even spiritual, though one would be hard pressed to insist that they (even Lazarus) had the life of God.
We see that Life is related to eating of Jesus which must be related to eating of the tree of Life.
In the New Heaven and earth, there will be a tree of life(two of them maybe...they are on both sides of the river...lol), said to be for the "healing" of the nations (which I feel probably points to man restored to his former condition rather than "if we get hurt...eat of the leaves").
What is good to consider is that the residents gained eternal life before entrance to the eternal state. Not only that, I would suggest that eternal life, the life of God, does not, and never has come from any source other than God Himself.
It seems reasonable to conclude that eternal life will not be sustained by the tree, as well as to conclude that eternal life was or would not have been sustained in the Garden.
This points the issue of Adam's separation from God, not the tree or the garden.
And this was the point, primarily, I hoped to be able to offer something to consider on. Again, you asked for "help," hope that qualifies.
Be back in a bit.
Seed? Twice in all the bible is the phrase "her seed" used Rev 12:17 and Gen 3:15 the seed of the virgin whose flesh and blood we must eat for Life.)
I see no correlation between the seed of trees and vegetation, the Seed of the woman, or the seed of the devil. Or the seed of anyone else mentioned in scripture, and there are many. But the former are prominent concerning man's fall, I feel. The latter also, as recipients of God's promises.
I am not saying that is what is said here, but just want to make that point.
Genesis 3:15 is by some, myself included, to be the first mention of the Gospel in scripture. It is the beginning of the promise of God to redeem man from his fallen state.
I see Revelation 12:1-4 to spak of the Seed mentioned in Genesis 3:15, but here:
Revelation 12
17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
...the "remnant of her seed" is a reference to the remaining, surviving Israelites.
(What is the trespass, sin that brought forth death?)
Gen. 3:6 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, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
The events that transpired were surely more detailed than what we have encapsulated in a few verses, but it is safe to say, I believe, that the offense that brought forth death, as well a judgment unto condemnation, was Adam's failure to obey God.
Not to eat of the tree was...law.
What trespass brought forth death that came through the man Adam?
Disobedience.
Gen. 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed (the seed of death all mankind)
Or perhaps the "children of the devil:"
John 8:44
King James Version (KJV)
44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
and her seed;(the seed of Life of the virgin) it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
Agreed, whole heartedly.
As I was saying all help and comments appreciated.
Not sure how much help that will be, Percho, and sorry for the length. I have been spoiling myself with spending a lot of time on the forums which I will soon probably not have available to me, so I guess I am getting in what I can now.
God bless.
I see no correlation between the seed of trees and vegetation, the Seed of the woman, or the seed of the devil. Or the seed of anyone else mentioned in scripture, and there are many. But the former are prominent concerning man's fall, I feel. The latter also, as recipients of God's promises.
I am not saying that is what is said here, but just want to make that point.
Genesis 3:15 is by some, myself included, to be the first mention of the Gospel in scripture. It is the beginning of the promise of God to redeem man from his fallen state.
I see Revelation 12:1-4 to spak of the Seed mentioned in Genesis 3:15, but here:
Revelation 12
17And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
...the "remnant of her seed" is a reference to the remaining, surviving Israelites.
The events that transpired were surely more detailed than what we have encapsulated in a few verses, but it is safe to say, I believe, that the offense that brought forth death, as well a judgment unto condemnation, was Adam's failure to obey God.
Not to eat of the tree was...law.
Disobedience.
Or perhaps the "children of the devil:"
John 8:44
King James Version (KJV)
44Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
Agreed, whole heartedly.
Not sure how much help that will be, Percho, and sorry for the length. I have been spoiling myself with spending a lot of time on the forums which I will soon probably not have available to me, so I guess I am getting in what I can now.
God bless.
Interesting and appreciate the time you put in your responses. I'll spend more time and get back to you.
Would you agree that it appears even from the link on trespass that trespasses seem to be sin that wasn't imputed because either it was committed before the law and or after the death and resurrection which brings justification which is imputed righteousness? The law being our schoolmaster and looking glass of what are trespasses, until the faith came by which we are justified.
BTW I do not believe according to the word of God we should qualify Death nor Life into physical and spiritual. I understand our minds can derive that concept from scripture however in the KJV you can search physical/spiritual death or life and will not get any hits. Think of it like this.
Rom 5:13,14 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression,
Does not that same death reign over us to whom our sin is not imputed because of, the faith of Christ until the resurrection from the dead unto Life?
Prophesy? Jesus said to her, `I am the rising again, and the life; he who is believing in me, even if he may die, shall live; (By resurrection)
and every one who is living (By that resurrection) and believing in me shall not die -- to the age; John 11:25,26 YLT
convicted1
Guest
What is your theory of sin? I don't think I have ever heard that term before, but the concept is much discussed. Basically the question is: what determines sin? This is not nominitively about labeling or quantizing sins (though these may have to used as examples), but just our standard for determining what makes an action sin. What is your best description of the question at hand among these options?
Sin is "anti-God", meaning something against God, i.e. Lucifer, Satan, the Great Red Dragon, the serpent in the Garden, Beelzebub, etc.
All sin is of the devil. When Satan speaks of lies, he speaks of himself, because he is a liar, and the father of it(John 8:44).