ECT Suggestion to Knight

[Danoh]

A person becomes corrupt when they give in to deceitful lusts. Not corrupt because they emerge from the womb corrupt. And the following words of James certainly demonstrates this fact:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas. 1:14-15).​

In the book Fallen:A Theology of Sin (a book which defends the theory of Original Sin) David B. Calhoun writes the following commentary about this passage:

"Temptation leads to sin, and, for the unrepentant, sin leads to spiritual death. 'Each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it is conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death' (James 1:14-15). James describes the deadly progression from evil desire, to being dragged away, to enticement, to conception, to birth and then finally to death. This sixfold progression proceeds from the mind, to the affections, to the will, to outward action, and to spiritual death" (David B. Calhoun, "Sin and Temptation" in Fallen: A Theology of Sin, 264).

Since all people die spiritually when they sin that must mean that all people, at one time or another, are spiritually alive. And that can only happen because all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive.

Just another dagger into the heart of the of the theory of Original Sin.

Amusing how you form your own obviously books inspired "logic" of men and their ever endless parroting of one another in their equally ever endless books "about" and then ask your questions from with said same vaccum.

No surprise then that the one poster on here who often agrees with you where they do, does.

Theirs is also often found to be the same kind of "logic" within their own vacuum.

But as some have been rightly illustrating, a proper understanding of any issue will be found to be based on the whole of Scripture, not on a few pet verses within one's own...vacuum.

In fact, any time any MAD is found having ended up on the wrong side of a position, that right there is often one of the very reasons why - a few passages alone, within one's own, resulting vacuum.

No surprise then, your often resorting to quoting your endless books based errors, even as you assert you are "rightly dividing THE WORD OF TRUTH."

There is...no reasoning...with your kind.

None.

Even when your kind do see the obvious pointed out to, your kind then rationalize all sorts of things.

You simply hate being wrong.

Talk about THE SIN that inspires that pride that goeth BEFORE...THE FALL...over again...EACH TIME.

Talk about THE SIN...REVIVED...EACH TIME...over, and over, and over BEFORE...EACH...FALL..

Genesis 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.

Yeah, I know - hunh?

Nevertheless, Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The sins of the father was imputed to the sons prior to Ezekiel 18.

Exodus 34:7 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.​

Do you think that what is said there is speaking of the sins of the fathers being imputed to the children?

Or perhaps the following commentary from Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers offers a better understanding:

"It is a fact that, under God's natural government of the world, the iniquity of fathers is visited upon their children. Diseases caused by vicious courses are transmitted. The parents' extravagance leaves their children beggars. To be the son of a felon is to be heavily handicapped in the race of life. That this should be so is perhaps involved in "the nature of things"--at any rate, it is part of the scheme of Divine government by which the world is ordered. We all inherit countless disadvantages on account of our first parents' sin."​

If you think that the father's sins are imputed to their sons then please explain how that idea can be reconciled with what is said here?:

"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" (Ezek.18:20).​

 

[Jerry Shugart]

There is...no reasoning...with your kind.

I am reasoning out of the Scriptures.

You ignored all those Scriptures.

 

[Danoh]

I answered on post #123 on this thread. Since you believe in the theory of Original Sin then please tell me why the following words do not contradict the teaching that Adam's sin and his death in sin has been imputed to his sons?:

"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" (Ezek.18:20).​

Never mind that entire book, let alone that entire chapter.

Never mind both its immediate and its remote context - the Law of Moses it is ALL based on.

Jerry has seen fit to rip it out of all that.

For what it proves by itself, when twisted to the service of Jerry's obviously, wrongly divided word.

I'm sorry Jerry, but you are either that incompetent or that wilfully dishonest.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[Danoh]

I am reasoning out of the Scriptures...

No you are not.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

 

[john w]

My response was in answer to what you said about infants dying physically:



I told you exactly why infants die physically and it is not because Adam's sin and death have been imputed to him.



Here is the "context" of the verse which you cite:

"What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Ro.6:21-23).​

It is easy to see that the spiritual death spoken of in this passage happens because of people's own sins and not because Adam's sin and death in sin has been imputed to them. And since all people die spiritually when they sin then that can only mean that at one time or another all people were alive spiritually. After all, before a person can die spiritually he must first be alive spiritually.

And the only way that all people can be alive spiritually is because all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive. That fact alone destroys the theory of Original sin which teaches that all people emerge from the womb spiritually dead.



Let us begin with a detailed look at Romans 5:12:

"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 (pas hamartano)" (Ro.5:12).​

Here Paul repeated the phrase "all have sinned" from earlier in the same epistle:

"For all have sinned (pas hamartano), and come short of the glory of God" (Ro.3:23).​

Even Reformed theologian Robert Schreiner sees that this is speaking a person's own individual sinning, writing that "5:12cd teaches that death spread to all because all sinned...Paul regularly argues in Romans 5 and 6 that sin begets death, context supports the interpretation, 'and so death spread to all men because all sinned'...to paraphrase: 'death spread to all people because all sinned individually'" [emphasis added] (Thomas R. Schreiner, Adam, the Fall, and Original Sin, 274,280).

Another theologian from the same camp agrees. Douglas J. Moo writes that "Paul certainly uses the verb 'sin' regularly to denote voluntary sinful acts committed by individuals; and this is what most commentators think that this same word, in the same tense as is used here (aorist), designates in 3:23: that all people, 'in their own persons,' commit sins. Probably a majority of contemporary scholars interpret 5:12d, then, to assert that the death of each person (v.12c) is directly caused by that person's own individual sinning" (Douglas J. Moo, "Sin in Paul," in Fallen: A Theology of Sin ed. Christoper W. Morgan and Robert A. Peterson [Wheaton IL: Crossway, 2013], 122-3).



That idea is ridiculous because the Scriptures reveal that people corrupt themselves:

"And the LORD said unto me, Arise, get thee down quickly from hence; for thy people which thou hast brought forth out of Egypt have corrupted themselves; they are quickly turned aside out of the way which I commanded them; they have made them a molten image" (Deut.9:12).​

The word "corrupt" means going from a state of being "good" unto one of being "bad." So when a person corrupts himself he goes from a state of "good" unto a state of being "bad."

A person cannot corrupt himself once he is already corrupt but if you are right then we must believe that he can.



Again, we croak because all people no longer have access to the very thing which would allow them to live forever--the Tree of Life (Gen.3:22-24).

Now please address the following words of Paul where he makes it plain that personal sins result in death: "What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death."

What kind of death?



Because it is appointed that all people die physically (Heb.9:27) and some people die earlier than other people.

Made up. Tell us what causes death, kid.


Sin, not sins, kid. Adam died spiritually, right away-physically, much later.

You've not answered the question. People croaked, w/o any law condemning them.


Why?

 

[john w]

Then tell me exactly how.

The context is physical existence, on earth, and its consequences, rather than spiritual salvation. If a man sins, he himself should be cut off from God’s promised land. This passage is speaking on the death of the physical body-end of verse 2. Then, after v 2, from verse 3, chapter eighteen repeats that those who sin shall die. This is not spiritual death. Rather, it is what Adam experienced, the death of the body. If a man sins, his days on earth shall be shortened by the LORD God.

Ezekiel is speaking of the guilt of the father’s sin never being held against the sons, generational curses,...and thus its consequences.


It is true that a father cannot bear the sin of his son, but the sacrifice for sin can.


When somebody living under the law of Moses sinned, they were responsible for what they had done, but they could be forgiven by a sacrifice that would bear their sin before a holy LORD God. Ez. 18...is not saying there is no sacrifice that can bear our sin/sins. No, we are individually responsible for our sins, and need to seek forgiveness through God's provision of a substitute sacrifice that can bear our sin/sins.

If not, then you assert that Christ could not bear our guilt.

 

[john w]

EXACTLY.

And EXACTLY also - how a thing is studied out.

WHEN a thing is PROPERLY studied out.

WHEN it is...

Now, should the positive of my compliment go to your head, JW, that too only proves just how sound your above post was.

For a thing goes to our head (pride) "because of sin" (singular) "that dwelleth in me."

In that moment, this "temptation" resident "in" our "flesh" - this darned sin nature (singular) has "REVIVED," and we have "died."

Alive unto sin dead unto righteousness, during such moments.

All because of sin (singular).

We're surrounded by it; in this mortal body of sin (singular).

We're talking an ever on going war.

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

But for a BUT which is NOW The Believer's.

5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

Fascinating - how each individual is driven by this dark life force within through "the DECEITFUL lusts" or desires.

More often then one is consciously aware.

Hence the call to THE BELIEVER...

Ephesians 4:22 That ye put off concerning the former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts; 4:23 And be renewed in the spirit of your mind; 4:24 And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

And again, tomorrow, and the day after that.

Until that Blessed Day of that Blessed Hope...

Philippians 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: 3:21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

Great post, JW.

Rom. 5: 6-8.

Thank you, D. My brilliance is only exceeded by my extreme humility.


But, then again-Jerry is always right.

 

[john w]

"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" (Ezek.18:20).​

All I hear are the crickets!

Why should anyone believe that the sin of Adam and his death in sin has been imputed to his own sons since Ezekiel 18:20 makes it plain that will not happen?

Crickets!

So, by that "logic," the Lord Jesus Christ could not bear the iniquity of us.


Nice "post a verse in isolation." Nice....

 

[JonahofAkron]

You don't understand what Paul is saying there because if you are right then the Lord's death lead to the justification of all men.

Is that what you believe?

Not that I disagree with you, but wouldn't that make it just the availability of justification for everyone? I assume that denial of said justification would make it impossible to 'impute'.

 

[john w]

Why do babies die, at age 2 weeks? Has that baby committed any "overt" act of sin? Have they done any fibbing? Stealing? Yet, they die.Why?

Because it is appointed that all people die physically (Heb.9:27) and some people die earlier than other people.

You did not address why people die, the root cause of death. All you've argued is "cuz."


Why death? Cuz? People croaked, from Adam, to Moses, w/o any law condemning them.

Why? Paul's argument.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

It is true that a father cannot bear the sin of his son, but the sacrifice for sin can.

If not, then you assert that Christ could not bear our guilt.

So if a sacrifice must be involved then who was the sacrifice in regard to the son bearing the sin of the father?:

"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" (Ezek.18:20).​

 

[genuineoriginal]

Do you think that what is said there is speaking of the sins of the fathers being imputed to the children?

Yes, it is quite clear that the sins of the fathers are being imputed to the children, the grand children, and the fourth generation.

Or perhaps the following commentary from Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers offers a better understanding:

"It is a fact that, under God's natural government of the world, the iniquity of fathers is visited upon their children. Diseases caused by vicious courses are transmitted. The parents' extravagance leaves their children beggars. To be the son of a felon is to be heavily handicapped in the race of life. That this should be so is perhaps involved in "the nature of things"--at any rate, it is part of the scheme of Divine government by which the world is ordered. We all inherit countless disadvantages on account of our first parents' sin."​

While these things do happen in "the nature of things", they are not the same as God visiting the iniquity of the fathers unto the children, grand children, and the fourth generation.

If you think that the father's sins are imputed to their sons then please explain how that idea can be reconciled with what is said here?:

"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" (Ezek.18:20).​

You are ignoring the time factor.

The iniquity of the father was imputed to the children, grand children, and fourth generation up until the declaration God made in Ezekiel 18:

Ezekiel 18:1-3 1 The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying, 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. 14 Now, lo, if he beget a son, that seeth all his father's sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like, 15 That hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hath not defiled his neighbour's wife, 16 Neither hath oppressed any, hath not withholden the pledge, neither hath spoiled by violence, but hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment, 17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury nor increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live. 18 As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people, lo, even he shall die in his iniquity.​

From the time of this pronouncement from God, the son no longer had the sins of the father imputed upon him, as long as the son rejected the father's sins and did what was right.
Because the son did not do like his father, he would live.
The father would die in his own iniquity.

 

[john w]

So if a sacrifice must be involved then who was the sacrifice in regard to the son bearing the sin of the father?:

"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" (Ezek.18:20).​

So, Christ could not die in our stead, kid?


You missed it.

 

[john w]

Yes, it is quite clear that the sins of the fathers are being imputed to the children, the grand children, and the fourth generation.


While these things do happen in "the nature of things", they are not the same as God visiting the iniquity of the fathers unto the children, grand children, and the fourth generation.


You are ignoring the time factor.

The iniquity of the father was imputed to the children, grand children, and fourth generation up until the declaration God made in Ezekiel 18:

Ezekiel 18:1-3 1 The word of the Lord came unto me again, saying, 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. 14 Now, lo, if he beget a son, that seeth all his father's sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like, 15 That hath not eaten upon the mountains, neither hath lifted up his eyes to the idols of the house of Israel, hath not defiled his neighbour's wife, 16 Neither hath oppressed any, hath not withholden the pledge, neither hath spoiled by violence, but hath given his bread to the hungry, and hath covered the naked with a garment, 17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury nor increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live. 18 As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people, lo, even he shall die in his iniquity.​

From the time of this pronouncement from God, the son no longer had the sins of the father imputed upon him, as long as the son rejected the father's sins and did what was right.
Because the son did not do like his father, he would live.
The father would die in his own iniquity.

Correct.The context is not spiritual salvation, as the kid muses.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You did not address why people die, the root cause of death. All you've argued is "cuz."

I have adressed it more than once with you and in response all I have heard back is "nothing." The following will explain exactly why people die physically:

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life" (Gen.3:22-24).​

Adam was created with a mortal body because for him to live for ever it was necessary for him to partake of the Tree of Life. And once he was denied being able to eat of that tree he died physically.

Since then no one can eat of the Tree of Life and that is why all people die physically. Just like Adam.

And all people die spiritually as a result of their own sin and not the sin of David:

"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses" (Col.2:13).​

Paul tells the Christians that they have been "quickened together" with Christ and that can only be speaking of "spiritual" life. So the death in the same verse is a "spiritual" death. Norman L. Geisler says the following about the "death" spoken of in this verse:

"Before a person is liberated to this new life in Christ, he is 'dead in' in his sins...Death means separation, not annihilation. Even the unsaved still bear the image of God (Gen.9:6; James 3:9), but they are separted from God. Cut off from spiritual life, they still have human life" [emphasis added] (Norman L. Geisler, "Colossians," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary; New Testament, 678).​

Since all people sin and die spiritually then that means that all people were alive spiritually at one time or another. And the only way that could possibly happen is because all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive.

That alone destroys the theory of Original Sin.

A person cannot be dead spiritually as a result of his own sin if he is born spiritually dead. After all, before a person can die spiritually he must first be alive spiritually.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So, Christ could not die in our stead, kid?

I didn't say that. You were saying that a father can bear the sins of the son IF IT INVOLVES A SACRIFICE.

If you want to use that idea in regard to the son bearing the sins of the father then you must show us how a sacrifice is involved.

 

[john w]

I have adressed it more than once with you and in response all I have heard back is "nothing." The following will explain exactly why people die physically:

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life" (Gen.3:22-24).​

Adam was created with a mortal body because for him to live for ever it was necessary for him to partake of the Tree of Life. And once he was denied being able to eat of that tree he died physically.

Since then no one can eat of the Tree of Life and that is why all people die physically. Just like Adam.

And all people die spiritually as a result of their own sin and not the sin of David:

"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses" (Col.2:13).​

Paul tells the Christians that they have been "quickened together" with Christ and that can only be speaking of "spiritual" life. So the death in the same verse is a "spiritual" death. Norman L. Geisler says the following about the "death" spoken of in this verse:

"Before a person is liberated to this new life in Christ, he is 'dead in' in his sins...Death means separation, not annihilation. Even the unsaved still bear the image of God (Gen.9:6; James 3:9), but they are separted from God. Cut off from spiritual life, they still have human life" [emphasis added] (Norman L. Geisler, "Colossians," in The Bible Knowledge Commentary; New Testament, 678).​

Since all people sin and die spiritually then that means that all people were alive spiritually at one time or another. And the only way that could possibly happen is because all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive.

That alone destroys the theory of Original Sin.

A person cannot be dead spiritually as a result of his own sin if he is born spiritually dead. After all, before a person can die spiritually he must first be alive spiritually.

Huh? Why did he die physically? Tree of life? He died years later....

Genesis 5:5 KJV And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died.

God said he would die that day:

Genesis 2:17 KJV But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.


He died spiritually......The wages of sin(singular) is death. Something happened to Adam....The life of God left him.....spiritual death=separation from God.

Grace/mercy-he is banned from the tree of life, as if he ate from it, in his "fallen" state, he would live forever as a sinner. He had to die....The LORD God has nothing good to say about us being "in Adam." Crucify those "in Adam."

The context is spiritual death, inherited from daddy Adam......


I will break it down, slowly....Why does the body deteriorate, break down....die? What happened in Eden? Sins? Why does sins, plural, cause physical death?


The bible says that the wages of sin, singular, is death, not sins.

And Colossians 2:13 KJV is talking about being spiritually dead, separated from God, because of being "in Adam," like father, like son.....Quickened, because we are "in Christ."

=Paul's contrast of "In Adam" vs. "In Christ."

 

[john w]

I didn't say that. You were saying that a father can bear the sins of the son IF IT INVOLVES A SACRIFICE.

If you want to use that idea in regard to the son bearing the sins of the father then you must show us how a sacrifice is involved.

So, the context is Ezekiel is not salvation?

You argue that Ezekiel 18:20 KJV is talking about the guilt of sins, not the consequences=your argument against "original sin" being imputed. Thus, Christ cannot bear the guilt of others' sins.


QED.

 

[Derf]

Can I ask you to cease from misrepresenting my beliefs because it is evident that Adam's sin resulted in mankind being denied the very thing which allowed people to live for ever--the tree of life.

You can ask, but then if you turn around and make the same assertion, it doesn't make any sense to ask it. Your assertion, as you've repeated here, is that man was not designed to live forever, but had to have an additional influence. Yet nowhere was man commanded to eat of the tree of life. Thus, he might have died even without sin. And thus, death is not just the wages of sin, but also the wages of not sinning. Thus the threat of death due to sin is not much of a threat.

You could make a convincing case that God commanded them to eat of the trees of the garden, and thus NOT eating would be a sin, but as far as we can tell, they were NEVER specifically commanded to eat of the tree of life.

If you are right then we must believe that the reason both Adam and Eve sinned because they both had a so-called sin nature.

That's not my assertion. That's what follows from you conflating what I said with what you already believe.

If you will examine what is said about the wages of sin being death then you will understand that the penalty is in regard to a person's own sin and not Adam's sin:

"What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Ro.6:21-24).​

This is not speaking about physical death because a person does not die physically when he sins. After Adam's actions resulted in mankind not being able to partake of the tree of life it is appointed unto men to die physically (Heb.9:27).

Wages are not always disbursed immediately upon completing a task.

Instead, the death is a spiritual death. And since all people die spiritually when they sin that can only mean that all people were alive spiritually at one time. And the only way that can be possible is because all people emerge from the womb spiritually alive and not spiritually alive as the advocates of the theory of Original Sin teach.

Death is about separation. Physical death is a separation of the soul from the physical body. Spiritual death is the separation of the soul from the source of spiritual life and that source is the LORD God.

Where do we find this definition in scripture? I recognize it, as I've been taught it from childhood. At best, it is inferred. But is it accurate?

Does your whole doctrine rest on this definition? If so, then you should at least be suspicious of the definition long enough to test your doctrine.