Without Me You Can Do Nothing

[Pastor_Bob]

Can you give us one single Biblical definition of sin that classifies any act done in true ignorance as sin?

Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
God did not impute the sin of idolatry because of their ignorance.

1 Peter 1:13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

I Can hardly believe you would use Ps. 58:3 It does not establish original sin in the least.

"The wicked are estranged from the womb] "This," says Dr. Kennicott, "and the next two verses, I take to be the answer of Jehovah to the question in the two first verses, as the 6th, 7th, and 8th, are the answer of the psalmist, and the remainder contains the decree of Jehovah." He calls these wicked men, men who had been always wicked, originally and naturally bad, and brought up in falsehood, flattery, and lying. The part they acted now was quite in character." Adam Clarke

"3-5. describe the wicked generally, who sin naturally, easily, malignantly, and stubbornly." Jamieson-Fausset Brown

"V. 3. Estranged-From God, and from all goodness. Their very natures are corrupt, even from their birth: they are the wicked offspring of sinful parents. Astray-By actual sins, from their childhood, as soon as ever they were capable of the exercise of reason." John Wesley

"No wonder they act so unrighteously, for their very natures and principles are corrupt, even from their birth. And this hereditary and native corruption, though too common to all men, he particularly ascribes to these men; either because their immediate parents were such as did not only convey a corrupt nature to them, but greatly improved it by wicked counsel and example." Matthew Poole

"Verses 3-5: The Psalmist here traced back the base conduct of his persecutors, (as he did his own crimes, Marg. Ref) to the source of original depravity; which had neither been counteracted by proper discipline, nor subdued by regenerating grace." Thomas Scott

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Pastor Bob: Acts 17:29
1 Peter 1:13

HP: Where is the connection between sin and ignorance in these verses? Scripture tells us that every violation of the law will receive a just recompense of reward, does it not? In the one passage you mentioned, God ‘winked’ not punished.

Certainly when God gives us light of our actions, even if before done in complete ignorance, they become sin as we look at them in retrospect. Just the same, where does it ever say that if total ignorance is truly the case that God judges such as ‘sin’ prior to receiving light? Did not the verse I quoted say specifically if they had no knowledge they would be without sin, at least in the areas they honestly had no knowledge?

Certainly in light of the Scripture you cited, in particular Acts 17:30, it would indicate to me that regardless of what they do not know and God does not judge as sin, all have indeed transgressed some law that they did understand enough at least to merit their intents and subsequent actions at least in some respect as being rightfully regarded as sin and as such held rightfully accountable to God for.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Pastor Bob: "The wicked are estranged from the womb]

HP: You are doing a great job with the first five verses. Now continue on explaining the rest of the chapter and the comparison the author was establishing.

 

[skypair]

Acts 17:29 Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device.
30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
God did not impute the sin of idolatry because of their ignorance.

Well, it's pretty clear that God "winked" at their disobedience but didn't CALL it sin as HP asked you to cite. I mean, you know it is sin and I know it is sin - but they didn't. Neither did God call it that.

1 Peter 1:13 Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and hope to the end for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
14 As obedient children, not fashioning yourselves according to the former lusts in your ignorance:
15 But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation;
16 Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

Again, you must give us scripture that proves the sin in ignorance was called sin by God.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Pastor Bob,

I too am surprised you use Psa 58:3 -- "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies." The first instance of their lying that David cites is their "speaking lies." How many infants do you know that even speak?? But as to "speaking lies," that also requires knowledge of what a lie is -- knowingly sinning.

I just can't help but agree with HP on this one.

skypair

 

[Pastor_Bob]

The first instance of their lying that David cites is their "speaking lies." How many infants do you know that even speak?? But as to "speaking lies," that also requires knowledge of what a lie is -- knowingly sinning.

I just can't help but agree with HP on this one.

Your disagreement is with the sweet psalmist of Israel. He said it; I'm simply repeating it.

 

[BobRyan]

The sinful nature is being described in Psalms and in Rom 3. It speaks to the depravity of the human condition not the intelligent planning of infants - but their "nature"

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Pastor Bob: Your disagreement is with the sweet psalmist of Israel. He said it; I'm simply repeating it.

HP: You are picking one portion of that psalm and extrapolating it to mean something not in the least suggested by the psalmist. You are trying to find a proof text to support an Augustinian notion of original sin, when it is clear from the rest of that psalms such is far from the psalmist’s intentions.

Why do you not tell us where in the world the righteous come from if the psalmist is trying to tell us that all are born sinners? Why do you not show us anywhere proof that the Jews believed in original sin? There are many scholars to pick from out there. Show us one reputable scholar that can give us anything from Jewish writings in line with the original sin of Augustine.

The truth is that it simply is no so. Any scholar worth his salt will affirm without question that Augustine is the father of the doctrine of original sin. The psalmist you draw from was simply making a comparison between the wicked and the righteous in poetic terms. In a worse case scenario, one would have to conclude no more than some are born wicked while others are born righteous from this psalm alone.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Why do you not show us anywhere proof that the Jews believed in original sin? There are many scholars to pick from out there. Show us one reputable scholar that can give us anything from Jewish writings in line with the original sin of Augustine.

Would the Apostle Paul qualify as a Jewish scholar? He wrote, in his letter to the Romans, "For the wages of sin is death..." and "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:"

If infants were not born with original sin, infants would not die, for the penalty of sin is death. Paul did not say that the penalty for being born with the propensity to sin was death; he said it was actual sin. Infants do die, sadly enough, confirming that they too pay the penalty for being born with sin.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Pastor Bob: Would the Apostle Paul qualify as a Jewish scholar? He wrote, in his letter to the Romans, "For the wages of sin is death..." and "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:"

HP: The Apostle Paul would indeed qualify, but he does not say what you are trying to make him say, just as David was not saying in Psalms 53 what you try and make him say. What I do not understand, I how you as, a pastor, a man I am certain has spoke to others about being careful to establish the context in passages of Scripture one approaches, seem to be oblivious to such council in your approach to the passage in question. Why do you avoid seeking the context of Psalms 53, being satisfied instead to just take an isolated verse and keep it isolated from the rest of the chapter so as to allow it to be seen by itself, outside of the context of the passage, walking on all four legs in support of original sin? How can any fair minded follower of our discussion not see the biased way you are approaching this passage? What would you say if I simply overlooked the first part of this passage and only dealt with the comments concerning the righteous, and then concluded all are born in original righteousness?

Pastor Bob: If infants were not born with original sin, infants would not die, for the penalty of sin is death.

HP: Where is your proof that infants, or adults for that matter, would not have seen a cessation of existence on this temporal planet, being created as temporal beings, apart from original sin? That is sheer unfounded conjecture. They might not have seen death as we now experience it had sin not came into the picture, but we were created as finite physical mortals, subject to undergoing change if we were to live eternally. You cannot house eternal being, procreating for eternity, on a finite planet. God states clearly that everything we see is temporal and subject to being destroyed at some point in time. It would be obvious to me that it was created that way by design. Besides, all have not seen death as we know it and neither will all men according to Scripture. There is some obvious harmonization that must be done between these passages of Scripture rather than to simply take one in support of a dogmatic notion so as to create fodder for the Augustinian notion of original sin.

So original sin is to blame for the death of children? Well, that would certainly be a welcome thought in the abortionist circles. Even Cain would appreciate hearing that, although I remain unconvinced that God would see it that way. Your argument appears to be indicating that physical death is a direct result of original sin and that is why infants die because of original sin. Why don’t we take that reasoning a simple step further and conclude that all that die, in reality, deserve death due to the fact of them all being sinners? Such reasoning makes the abortionist to be some kind of right hand man of God, simply carrying out the just penalty for them being born sinners. Seriously, I think you need to rethink your statement Pastor. It is fraught with absurd conclusions resulting logically from your premise.

I would clearly admit that the timing of death, even in SOME cases of infants dying, is due to the ‘effects of sin.’ Sin has indeed affected the human race negatively, and has had a great negative impact on the sensibilities of the human race. We are born with depraved sensibilities and even deformity of the flesh. I believe we all could agree that all of the physical depavity can be directly associated with the effects of sin on the human race. Just the same, the Apostle Paul DID NOT SAY that we die because of Adam’s sin passed onto us in the form of original sin, but rather it states that we die because, “ALL HAVE SINNED.” Is that not exactly what the verse states? Where does the author imply original sin?


Death is a physical reality of being born into the human family, which are housed by design in a temporal body. This trait, being a physical one, is indeed passed on to ones posterity through physical generation, yet that still in no wise establishes the false concept of original sin. Original sin proposes that sin lies in the realm of the physical when in reality Scripture states sin is NOT physical, but rather is a ‘transgression of the law.’

Death is a result of sin, but sin is not a result of death as the dogma of original sin would have us to believe. Sin leads to death but death does not lead to sin. Death is the cessation of sin in the flesh, not the transmitter of sin in the flesh. The effect is not the cause, and the effect does not generate the cause. The cause of sin has always been and will always be a willful transgression against a known commandment of God.

Adam cannot be the cause of my sin anymore than we can be the cause of the sins of our children. We are indeed strong influence towards sin or righteousness in the lives of our offspring, but God states emphatically that He does not hold the child responsible for the sins of the father, but rather every man is held accountable for his own sins.

Listen well to Scripture on how sin is formed. “Jas 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.

Again, carefully understand that sin is NOT the results of death, but rather death is the results of sin. Sin is not transmitted by the punishment, nor is sin passed on by any physical means, neither can it be.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

Sin is not transmitted by the punishment, nor is sin passed on by any physical means, neither can it be.

We are arguing over semantics here. What I call "sin" you call the "sin nature." Those born with a sin nature sin; it's that simple. The sin nature surely can be passed by physical means, otherwise Jesus needn't be born of a virgin.

Where is your proof that infants, or adults for that matter, would not have seen a cessation of existence on this temporal planet, being created as temporal beings, apart from original sin?

1 Cor 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

So original sin is to blame for the death of children?

Sin is to be blamed for all death. Why single out children? Only those without sin can avoid the penalty of death. That is what makes the atonement a reality. He who knew no sin became sin for us.

Your argument appears to be indicating that physical death is a direct result of original sin and that is why infants die because of original sin. Why don’t we take that reasoning a simple step further and conclude that all that die, in reality, deserve death due to the fact of them all being sinners?

You pretty much summarized what I believe on the issue. All mankind deserves death and will face death (Heb. 9:27) as the penalty for sin.

Seriously, I think you need to rethink your statement Pastor. It is fraught with absurd conclusions resulting logically from your premise.

No offense friend, but I'll stick to my views which I believe are rooted in biblical principles and proper application. You see, I do not make these remarks flippantly as you imply; I indeed do my homework. For example: 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. Treasury of David

Just the same, the Apostle Paul DID NOT SAY that we die because of Adam’s sin passed onto us in the form of original sin, but rather it states that we die because, “ALL HAVE SINNED.” Is that not exactly what the verse states? Where does the author imply original sin?

Before Adam sinned, there was neither death nor sin. Now, since Adam, there are both. Death (the penalty of sin) was passed to all men. Does it not stand to reason that sin also was passed to all men? All men die because all men are sinners. Men die at all ages and stages of life because men are sinners even from their mother's womb.

God states emphatically that He does not hold the child responsible for the sins of the father, but rather every man is held accountable for his own sins.

I'd say God emphatically warns fathers that their children will suffer because of their sin.
Ex 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
Ex 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.
Numbers 14:18 The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.
Deut 5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,

What I do not understand, I how you as, a pastor, a man I am certain has spoke to others about being careful to establish the context in passages of Scripture one approaches, seem to be oblivious to such council in your approach to the passage in question.

How can any fair minded follower of our discussion not see the biased way you are approaching this passage?

If you are implying that I am handling the Scriptures deceitfully, then this conversation is over. I am aware of each passage and its literal interpretation, but I am also aware of the applications of each passage. I have not violated any scriptural truth with the declaration of my position.
On the contrary, I have supported my views with scriptures that do apply and are in their proper context regardless of how ardently you feel to the contrary.

Although the Word of God alone is my final authority, I also am in agreement with a multitude of sources which I reference frequently. So, you see, I do not post carelessly or deceitfully.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim
Sin is not transmitted by the punishment, nor is sin passed on by any physical means, neither can it be.

Pastor Bob: The sin nature surely can be passed by physical means, otherwise Jesus needn't be born of a virgin.

HP: I would beg to differ with your assessment of why Jesus needed to be born of a virgin. Those believing in original sin have to have it that way to keep the original sin away from Christ. Scripture asserts no such conclusion that I have found. Would you have a passage of Scripture that indicates your position is so?
Quote:

HP: Where is your proof that infants, or adults for that matter, would not have seen a cessation of existence on this temporal planet, being created as temporal beings, apart from original sin?

Pastor Bob: 1 Cor 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

HP: Am I the only one that does not understand that the verses quoted do not answer the question I asked? You have highlighted "in Adam all die” but you did not highlight “in Christ shall all be made alive.” If the passage does not support universalism, there is no indication it supports any notion of original sin either.

Pastor Bob: Sin is to be blamed for all death. Why single out children? Only those without sin can avoid the penalty of death. That is what makes the atonement a reality. He who knew no sin became sin for us.

HP: I singled out children because of your remarks concerning them. Let me ask you once again. If original sin is the cause of their death, why do not all infants die? You say that all die, but in reality that is not the case. Enoch and Elijah never saw death. Those carried away in the rapture will not see death either. If all are born in original sin, why do not all die, but rather some are simply translated?

Pastor Bob: You pretty much summarized what I believe on the issue. All mankind deserves death and will face death (Heb. 9:27) as the penalty for sin.

HP: Then may I ask you again. Do infants deserve death? If so is the abortionist just helping God along carrying out their just desserts?

Pastor Bob: You see, I do not make these remarks flippantly as you imply; I indeed do my homework. For example: 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.

HP: So I am wicked in wresting of Scripture to deny that Psalms 51 :5 does not teach original sin? Well, I certainly am in good company.

Pastor Bob: Surely men who cavil at this doctrine have need to be taught of the Holy Spirit what be the first principles of the faith.

HP: I certainly need to be taught of the Holy Spirit. I believe I have been, and pray that God will see fit to continue teaching me as well. It is strange that you would say this in light of the fact that one of the greatest evangelists that ever graced our shores did not believe in the Augustinian dogma of original sin. The fact that he did not believe it, and properly placed the burden of sin upon the individual’s will where it belonged, lead him to start and maintain the biggest revival of religion this nation has ever seen. God, give us more men like him.

Pastor Bob: Before Adam sinned, there was neither death nor sin. Now, since Adam, there are both. Death (the penalty of sin) was passed to all men. Does it not stand to reason that sin also was passed to all men?

HP: Absolutely not. There is not one Scripture in all of Holy Writ that proclaims sin is passed onto all men. You seem to fail to distinguish between cause and effect. You fail to distinguish between physical death, an effect of sin, and spiritual death, the penalty for sin. Physical death was an effect that was passed to subsequent generations via our natural physical connection to Adam, but that does not necessitate the cause was passed on. Spiritual death passed upon all men BECAUSE all have sinned.

Pastor Bob: …… men are sinners even from their mother's womb.

HP: There is only one verse you can point to that establishes a connection between sin and the womb, Psalms 51:5. Here, David speaks of himself in the FIRST person, and in no way states or insinuates that the whole human race is born into this world under the same circumstances. He clearly states that his mother conceived ‘him’ in sin. Yes, the Scripture does in fact state that he was conceived in less than a proper moral setting, and as such sin had an influence upon his life, even from the moment of conception. I will let the reader decide who is reading more into this verse than what can be logically proven by the Word itself.
Quote:
HP: God states emphatically that He does not hold the child responsible for the sins of the father, but rather every man is held accountable for his own sins.

Pastor Bob: I'd say God emphatically warns fathers that their children will suffer because of their sin.
Ex 20:5 Ex 34:7

HP: God states this through the prophet Ezekiel: Eze 18:2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge? 3 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.
What proverb are you bringing up Pastor? Does this passage in Ezekiel speak directly to the verses you are mentioning? What trumps what? The OT is a schoolmaster. Is it any wonder the further we read in the OT the greater the understanding God gave them of sin, righteousness, and His ways? What weight do you place upon this passage in Ezekiel? Is it possible that you are trying to impose an old proverb(s)that God said we would have no more occasion to use?

 

[steaver]

God bless you for hanging in there pastor Bob. :thumbs:

Sometimes these discusions really get me head shaken. It's like saying look here the scripture says "Jesus is Lord of all" and then the opposer says....now where do you get the idea that Jesus is Lord of all from that!

God Bless! :thumbs:

 

[BobRyan]

HP Quote:
Where is your proof that infants, or adults for that matter, would not have seen a cessation of existence on this temporal planet, being created as temporal beings, apart from original sin?

Pastor Bob
1 Cor 15:20 But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept.
21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

Also Romans 5 and Romans 8

Romans 5
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned[/b]
13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
15 But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.

16 The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.
17 For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more [b]those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19 For as [b]through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners[/b], even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.



Rom 8.
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to us.
19 For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the revealing of the sons of God.
20 For the [b]creation was subjected to futility[/b], not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope
21 that the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption into the freedom of the glory of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groans and suffers the pains of childbirth together until now.
23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

OK BR. Now tell us about the deaths of Enoch and Elijah and those that will live to see Christ's return. Have or will, according to Scripture, these seen or will see death as we know it?

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BR has not set forth one Scriptural passage that refutes in any way that which I have stated about death or ‘cessation of existence’ on this temporal planet. I have not brought into question whether or not death as we know it, especially the timing of it at such an early age in comparison to the early days of this earth, is not a direct consequence of sin. BR misses the point entirely. My point is that we were created as temporal beings, in the flesh, and as such would have had to have been changed to live eternally. Scripture is clear. That which is seen is temporal. It does not say that which is seen ‘because of sin’ is temporal.

It is obvious to me that we were created as temporal beings by design on a temporal planet for a specific purpose.(s) If there had been no sin, God still would have had to translate or change these mortal bodies at some point in time in order for them to inherit eternity. Nothing physical as we know it is designed for eternal existence. It shall all be destroyed or undergo a neccesitated change, and that by design.

There is a clear distinction between being translated as Enoch and Elijah were and those that live to see the return of our Lord will experience on that day, and death as we know it. In death you have a body that decays, at least for a time period. In a translation, there is no body left to decay. It is simply changed in an instant.

Again, my point is NOT as BR seems to wrongly indicate, that I am claiming that physical death as we know it is not a consequence of sin. I have never said or implied any such thing. My point is that we were created as temporal beings on a temporal planet for reasons known to God. If anything physical would ever inherit eternity, it would have to undergo change from the physical existence it once knew, sin or no sin. There is no indication that human beings would not have seen death as we experience it apart from sin, but the physical cannot nor could it ever escape a change in order to inherit immortality. There is a clear distinction between death and being changed to inherit immortality. There is change in death, but there is a change apart from death as we know it. Some have and will experience such a ‘deathless’ change.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

BR, is your response to my posts simply not to respond, or did you simply overlook them? Can you see any distinction betweeen physical death as we know it and being translated or raptured? If so, let me ask you once again. Have all or will all see death as we know it? Can you site one quote where I have ever stated or implied that death did not come as a direct result of sin? If you can, I certainly need to restate my position.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Ps 58:1 ¶ <<To the chief Musician, Altaschith, Michtam of David.>> Do ye indeed speak righteousness, O congregation? do ye judge uprightly, O ye sons of men?
2 Yea, in heart ye work wickedness; ye weigh the violence of your hands in the earth.
3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
4 Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;
5 Which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so wisely.
6 ¶ Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O LORD.
7 Let them melt away as waters which run continually: when he bendeth his bow to shoot his arrows, let them be as cut in pieces.
8 As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun.
9 Before your pots can feel the thorns, he shall take them away as with a whirlwind, both living, and in his wrath.
10 The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked.
11 So that a man shall say, Verily there is a reward for the righteous: verily he is a God that judgeth in the earth.

HP: Is there one daring soul on this list that would be so kind as to tell us where in the world the righteous spoken of come from in this chapter, and why David would have desired his own teeth to be smashed in his mouth as an infant, and why he would have desired that he would have ‘passed away’ in a miscarriage due to the ‘original sin’ of himself as an infant? If all are born in original sin, and this passge is supporting that notion, where are the righteous hailing from that are rejoicing at the just desserts of every child ever born including themselves as God is called upon to smash their teeth in their mouths and destroy them??? Are we being careful and serious with the Word of God?

Pastor Bob, you owe this chapter a deeper study than that which you so far have given it. Tell me again that this chapter supports the notion of original sin. Show us one writing anywhere from any true Jew that holds to or held to any such Augustinian notion such as original sin.

 

[skypair]

Your disagreement is with the sweet psalmist of Israel. He said it; I'm simply repeating it.

So you recite things you don't understand? Is that a good thing for a pastor to do?

(I hope you didn't get to see my sarcastic remark.) Look, Bob -- the primary cause of death is sin. The secondary cause is Adam's trasmissible weakness in the flesh -- "I serve the law of sin which is in my members." (Paul, Rom 7:23). The "law of sin" comes from having sinned, not from being born.

skypair