Is obeying the Lord and His Commandments required for salvation?

[JLB]

Why Amen to post no. 222?

Do you believe man is born with the sin nature already present?
Or it comes about at some later time as Ernest T. Bass believes?

This statement of his is what I agree with...

Paul does not say in Rom 3 men are born depraved.

 

[crossnote]

No, you are ASSUMING they are unconditionally made sinners. Rom 5:19 is like a if-then type statement. If 19a is true, then-so also is 19b true. Meaning if it is true many are made sinners UNconditionally then so also is it true that same many will be UNconditionally made righteous......and you have Universalism in salvation.

Nowhere in the Bible do I find anyone being called a sinner who had not sinned nor anyone called righteous(saved) who had done no righteousness (obedience to God's commands).

Rom 9:11 "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil,...."
The children had done no evil so they were not sinners. Having done no good or evil means children are born in a neutral, safe state.

Psalm 51:5 (KJV) Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
I guess you believe you were shapen in neutrality.

 

[crossnote]

(In the first 4 chapters of Romans, the only work Paul excludes from salvation is the strict perfect, flawless work in law keeping that the OT required to be justified.)

The law never ever justified...
Acts 13:39 (KJV) And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Romans 3:20 (KJV) Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Romans 3:28 (KJV) Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Galatians 2:16 (KJV) Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 3:11 (KJV) But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
Galatians 5:4 (KJV) Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

As a back up, read Hebrews 11, showing how the heroes of faith were approved.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Psalm 51:5 (KJV) Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.
I guess you believe you were shapen in neutrality.

David did NOT say he was born a sinner, that idea is assumed into the verse.

The idea that David is saying he was born a lost, unforgiven reprobate in Psa 51:5 does not harmonize with what David says in Psa 139:14. Was David praising God for having made him a lost, sinful reprobate? No.
Having David born a sinner in Psa 51:5 does not fit with David's words of Psalms 22:9-10 at all.

It is a dangerous thing to try and create doctrine/theology from language that is very highly figurative as is the context of Psalms 51. Many different interpretations can be applied to Psa 51:5 that would be Biblical. Any literal meaning attached to highly figurative passage as in Psa 51 cannot contradict other passages. Having David born a sinner does contradict other passages as Eze 18:20.

My personal belief is David is talking about being born in a sinful environment. The world is a sinful place and we are all born into that sinful environment:

The Hebrew is:

henbeawon (behold in transgression) cholaletti (I caused labor pains) uvechefe (and by a sinner) yechemathni (she was in heat to conceive me) immi (my mother)

The core difference between the NIV and the remaining translations is how the preposition 'be' is interpreted. In Hebrew, be "has a diverse range of nuances and meanings. The most common meanings are spatial." [The Complete Biblical Library: Hebrew - English Dictionary] That is, this preposition has to do with the location of one object relative to another. Generally the word is translated as in, with, by, at, on, against, or after depending upon the context in which it was used.

Could you explain the different translations of Psalm 51:5 in detail?

Hence David is talking about location, being born in a sinful environment. The same Hebrew word found in Psa 51:5 is also found in Gen 19:15
"And when the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot, saying, Arise, take thy wife, and thy two daughters, which are here; lest thou be consumed in the iniquity of the city."

Lot was IN a sinful environment of Sodom and being told to relocate out of that sinful environment. "In the iniquity" does not mean Lot had inherited the sins of Sodom nor that he even committed the same sin of Sodom but that he was in an environment of sin and was to leave it. Likewise David was shapen in a sinful environment and in a sinful environment he was conceived.

 

[JLB]

I guess Paul is confused.?.

Romans 3:28 ESV
[28] For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.

Romans 4:6 ESV
[6] just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:

What works would you like to to faith?

Guess you ridicule the whole reformation and would return us to Rome ?

It’s certainly not Paul that’s confused.

The entire book of Romans is contextually about the subject of the obedience of faith.


Through Him we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name, Romans 1:5


But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for
for the obedience of faith: Romans 16:26



Paul and James teach the same exact principle of faith.

Faith alone, all by itself is dead, and can not save.


Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead. James 2:17



JLB

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

The law never ever justified...
Acts 13:39 (KJV) And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses.
Romans 3:20 (KJV) Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
Romans 3:28 (KJV) Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Galatians 2:16 (KJV) Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Galatians 3:11 (KJV) But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith.
Galatians 5:4 (KJV) Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

As a back up, read Hebrews 11, showing how the heroes of faith were approved.

I agree with you that the OT law did not justify. That OT law required the work of perfect flawless sinlessness to be justified. Just one sin and that would bring the curse of the law upon one Gal 3:10. That OT law showed no mercy, it only condemned.

The OT law requirement of perfect sinless is why Paul would say "But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." Gal 3:11. Again, no one, other than Christ, kept the OT law perfectly and since no man could keep that OT law perfectly no man could be justified by that OT law.

You speak of the faith of those in Heb 11. In Gal 3:12 "And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them." It does seem strange Paul says the OT law is not of faith after reading about the faith of those OT characters in Heb 11. Again, faith under the OT law did not matter when being justified what mattered was what one did in keeping the whole law perfectly. One commentator puts it "The Law did not even require faith, as seen in the quotation Paul gave here from Leviticus 18:5, the meaning of which may be paraphrased, "No matter about faith; do the Law and live. This was the essence of Judaism." Coffman.

Romans chapters 1-4 briefly:
Rom 1 Paul proves the Gentiles are sinners
Rom 2 Paul proves the Jews are sinners
(Nowhere does he ever say Jew and Gentile were born sinners)

After proving both Jew and Gentile are sinners Paul says all (Jew and Gentile) are under sin Rom 3:9.

Those under sin are in need of justification. Paul spends about the first 2/3rds of Romans 3 explaining what does NOT justify (OT law) and last 1/3rd about what DOES justify (faith).

After proving Jew and Gentiles are sinners (Rom 1 and 2) Paul addresses the Jews beginning in Rom 3 and the OT law that was given them. Having the OT law was a major advantage the Jews had over the Gentiles. Yet one thing that OT law could not do was totally justify the Jew for it required perfect sinlessness. Was the Jew under the OT perfectly sinless? No! (Rom 3:9) The Jew sinned just as the Gentile. Paul cites from the OT verses that proved the Jew sinned in Rom 3:10-18. Then in Rom 3:19 Paul says "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God."
It was the Jew who was under the OT law so we know verses 10-18 was being specifically directed at the Jews who were under that OT law. Paul in v19 is essentially telling the Jews that your own law given to you says you are sinners hence no better than Gentiles.

So Jew and Gentile have sinned and are under sin and need of justification. We see from the first part of Rom 3 the OT law could not provide that justification. Then what can justify the Jew and Gentile? Paul tells us in the last part of Rom 3 what can justify "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."

Paul says "FAITH" justifies. he did NOT say faith only justifies. Faith justifies apart from the strict flawless work of law keeping the OT required.

Rom 4:
Paul gives an example of what he just spoke about in Rom chapters 1-3. Paul picks two men to use as his example, not any men at random but two men the Jews would know about very well Abraham and David. Abraham was a Gentile, David a Jew and Paul said in Rom 1-2 Jew and Gentile have sinned, hence need justification. Rom 3 Paul shows the OT did not jsutify for it required sinless perfection. Were Abraham and David perfectly sinless? No both men sin, were "ungodly" Rom 4:5. So neither could be justified by the OT law. So they would have to be justified by FAITH.

Rom 4:5 "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

I see Rom 4:5 a restatement of Rom 3. Abraham and David "worketh not", that is, they did not work to keep the OT law perfectly both sinned hence could not be justified by the OT law. "But believeth" that is, both had an obedient faith in doing God's will.

Rom 4:6 "Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,"
Again, "without works" refers to the strict flawless work of law keeping the OT required to be justified. Both men had obedient works in doing the will of God but neither had perfect sinless flawless works.

Rom 4:7 "Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered."
Does God forgive and cover the sins of the man who remains disobedient to Him or the man who obeys Him? Those who obey.

Rom 4:8 "Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin."

God reckons sin or righteousness to a man. David was reckoned righteous by his obedient faith (not by faith only).

ROm chapters 1-4 the only work Paul says will not justify is the flawless perfect law keeping the OT required. Nowhere ever did Paul eliminate faithful obedience from being saved. Paul is contrasting perfect flawless work of law keeping versus an obedient faith.

 

[crossnote]

David did NOT say he was born a sinner, that idea is assumed into the verse.

The idea that David is saying he was born a lost, unforgiven reprobate in Psa 51:5 does not harmonize with what David says in Psa 139:14. Was David praising God for having made him a lost, sinful reprobate? No.
Having David born a sinner in Psa 51:5 does not fit with David's words of Psalms 22:9-10 at all.

It is a dangerous thing to try and create doctrine/theology from language that is very highly figurative as is the context of Psalms 51. Many different interpretations can be applied to Psa 51:5 that would be Biblical. Any literal meaning attached to highly figurative passage as in Psa 51 cannot contradict other passages. Having David born a sinner does contradict other passages as Eze 18:20.

My personal belief is David is talking about being born in a sinful environment. The world is a sinful place and we are all born into that sinful environment:

The Hebrew is:


The core difference between the NIV and the remaining translations is how the preposition 'be' is interpreted. In Hebrew, be "has a diverse range of nuances and meanings. The most common meanings are spatial." [The Complete Biblical Library: Hebrew - English Dictionary] That is, this preposition has to do with the location of one object relative to another. Generally the word is translated as in, with, by, at, on, against, or after depending upon the context in which it was used.

Could you explain the different translations of Psalm 51:5 in detail?

Hence David is talking about location, being born in a sinful environment. The same Hebrew word found in Psa 51:5 is also found in Gen 19:15
"And when the morning arose, then the angels hastened Lot, saying, Arise, take thy wife, and thy two daughters, which are here; lest thou be consumed in the iniquity of the city."

Lot was IN a sinful environment of Sodom and being told to relocate out of that sinful environment. "In the iniquity" does not mean Lot had inherited the sins of Sodom nor that he even committed the same sin of Sodom but that he was in an environment of sin and was to leave it. Likewise David was shapen in a sinful environment and in a sinful environment he was conceived.

Nevertheless death reigned 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. (Rom 5:14)

Why did they die if they had not sinned? Why did they sin if they were not by nature sinners? Why is it that everyone dies?

 

[crossnote]

I agree with you that the OT law did not justify. That OT law required the work of perfect flawless sinlessness to be justified. Just one sin and that would bring the curse of the law upon one Gal 3:10. That OT law showed no mercy, it only condemned.

The OT law requirement of perfect sinless is why Paul would say "But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." Gal 3:11. Again, no one, other than Christ, kept the OT law perfectly and since no man could keep that OT law perfectly no man could be justified by that OT law.

You speak of the faith of those in Heb 11. In Gal 3:12 "And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them." It does seem strange Paul says the OT law is not of faith after reading about the faith of those OT characters in Heb 11. Again, faith under the OT law did not matter when being justified what mattered was what one did in keeping the whole law perfectly. One commentator puts it "The Law did not even require faith, as seen in the quotation Paul gave here from Leviticus 18:5, the meaning of which may be paraphrased, "No matter about faith; do the Law and live. This was the essence of Judaism." Coffman.

Romans chapters 1-4 briefly:
Rom 1 Paul proves the Gentiles are sinners
Rom 2 Paul proves the Jews are sinners
(Nowhere does he ever say Jew and Gentile were born sinners)

After proving both Jew and Gentile are sinners Paul says all (Jew and Gentile) are under sin Rom 3:9.

Those under sin are in need of justification. Paul spends about the first 2/3rds of Romans 3 explaining what does NOT justify (OT law) and last 1/3rd about what DOES justify (faith).

After proving Jew and Gentiles are sinners (Rom 1 and 2) Paul addresses the Jews beginning in Rom 3 and the OT law that was given them. Having the OT law was a major advantage the Jews had over the Gentiles. Yet one thing that OT law could not do was totally justify the Jew for it required perfect sinlessness. Was the Jew under the OT perfectly sinless? No! (Rom 3:9) The Jew sinned just as the Gentile. Paul cites from the OT verses that proved the Jew sinned in Rom 3:10-18. Then in Rom 3:19 Paul says "Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God."
It was the Jew who was under the OT law so we know verses 10-18 was being specifically directed at the Jews who were under that OT law. Paul in v19 is essentially telling the Jews that your own law given to you says you are sinners hence no better than Gentiles.

So Jew and Gentile have sinned and are under sin and need of justification. We see from the first part of Rom 3 the OT law could not provide that justification. Then what can justify the Jew and Gentile? Paul tells us in the last part of Rom 3 what can justify "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law."

Paul says "FAITH" justifies. he did NOT say faith only justifies. Faith justifies apart from the strict flawless work of law keeping the OT required.

Rom 4:
Paul gives an example of what he just spoke about in Rom chapters 1-3. Paul picks two men to use as his example, not any men at random but two men the Jews would know about very well Abraham and David. Abraham was a Gentile, David a Jew and Paul said in Rom 1-2 Jew and Gentile have sinned, hence need justification. Rom 3 Paul shows the OT did not jsutify for it required sinless perfection. Were Abraham and David perfectly sinless? No both men sin, were "ungodly" Rom 4:5. So neither could be justified by the OT law. So they would have to be justified by FAITH.

Rom 4:5 "But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."

I see Rom 4:5 a restatement of Rom 3. Abraham and David "worketh not", that is, they did not work to keep the OT law perfectly both sinned hence could not be justified by the OT law. "But believeth" that is, both had an obedient faith in doing God's will.

Rom 4:6 "Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,"
Again, "without works" refers to the strict flawless work of law keeping the OT required to be justified. Both men had obedient works in doing the will of God but neither had perfect sinless flawless works.

Rom 4:7 "Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered."
Does God forgive and cover the sins of the man who remains disobedient to Him or the man who obeys Him? Those who obey.

Rom 4:8 "Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin."

God reckons sin or righteousness to a man. David was reckoned righteous by his obedient faith (not by faith only).

ROm chapters 1-4 the only work Paul says will not justify is the flawless perfect law keeping the OT required. Nowhere ever did Paul eliminate faithful obedience from being saved. Paul is contrasting perfect flawless work of law keeping versus an obedient faith.

How in the world do you explain the new birth, a new nature given. The way you speak, who needs a new nature?...

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
(2Co 5:17)

Ephesians 2:3 (KJV) Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
(Joh 1:12)

Why?

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Nevertheless death reigned 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. (Rom 5:14)

Why did they die if they had not sinned? Why did they sin if they were not by nature sinners? Why is it that everyone dies?

Men physically die as a consequence of Adam sinning. A drunk driver crosses the center line killing people in another vehicle. They died as a consequence of the drunk driver's sin, do not inherit the drunk driver's sin.

If all die from inheriting Adam's sin then why does the verse say 'over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression"? If all die due to inheriting Adam's sin then all die from the exact same sin of Adam, but the verse speaks of those who died after for sins different from Adam's, died for their own sins not Adam's.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

How in the world do you explain the new birth, a new nature given. The way you speak, who needs a new nature?...

Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
(2Co 5:17)

Ephesians 2:3 (KJV) Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
(Joh 1:12)

Why?

IN CHRIST is the only place a spiritual life can be found. Outside of Christ the old man of sin exists. The verse does not in anyway imply men are born sinful but salvation for all men that do sin is found in Christ. In Christ, all the old sins are purged and new man, new creation without sin lives in Christ.

 

[GodsGrace]

Eph 2 does NOT say those Ephesians were born sinners. I made a post on this context earlier.

Ephesians 2:3 says we are BY NATURE children of wrath.
The nature you refuse to accept, believing instead that we sin for no reason at all and that we suffer no effects from the sin of Adam.

Ephesians 2:3
3Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

Romans 6 states that we re slaves to the one to whom we present ourselves.
Until we are born again,,,we present ourselves to satan..

Romans 6:16
16Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness?

This is the tendency we have toward sin until we are born again.

Infants/small children do not sin, are not capable of sinning and not accountable to God Rom 7:8-9.

Agreed.

No, Gen 8:21 says evil from YOUTH. It does NOT say evil from BIRTH.

I linked the Hebrew meaning of the word YOUTH. It's your choice to pay no attention to it.
It means from birth.

There is a difference in how one is BORN and what one BECOMES. All are BORN innocent but BECOME sinners sometime in youth.

I've posted scripture...could you please post a verse that says we are born innocent or lacking the sin nature?
From the N.T. please.

Nowhere is na'uwr translated birth.

It can mean youth or it can mean from birth -- as an age factor.
If you're a scholar in the Hebrew language, then Biblehub's lexicon is incorrect.

Again, sin is transgression of God's law 1 John 3:4. Sin is not something passed from parents to child Eze 18:20 nor is sin a substance like bacteria passed from person to person, sin is not just an idea passed from person to person. It is a transgression against God's law and infants do not sin are not capable of sinning. Rom 7:8-9 infants are "without law" meaning sin is dead to them, has no power over them. But sin springs up later in one's life when he becomes accountable to God having learned right from wrong.

I've NEVER said sin is imputed.
What I've said is that the EFFECT of original sin has passed from Adam to every generation after him.

Romans 5:12
12Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

Death spread through sin.
Adam was created not to die.
Now all men die because of his sin.
His sin is known as Original Sin.
His sin is not IMPUTED to us,,,,
but the EFFECTS of his sin spread through all mankind.

Adam was created perfectly.
By the time of Noah, God decided that men were wicked.
What changed?
Original Sin entered into man.

Men sin by choice not because some nature they were born with causes them to sin against their will.

Men are born with the sin nature,,,also called the flesh,,,some call carnality...


Romans 8:3-13
3For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh, 4so that the requirement of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who do not walk according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. 6For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, 7because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, 8and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
9However, you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Him. 10If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.

12So then, brethren, we are under obligation, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh— 13for if you are living according to the flesh, you must die; but if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live.


What do you believe THE FLESH means?

Jesus was born as a man (Heb 2:16-17; Phil 2:7-8) born of a human mother (Lk 1:21) and was sinless for He chose not to sin. If OS were true then He would have been born a sinner. This is a major problem for those that believe in OS so they are forced to come up with ways NOT FOUND IN THE BIBLE to get around this problem. It's case of one error (OS) leading to more error.

Mary was born sinless so that she could be the perfect mother of a sinless man....Jesus.
Jesus and Adam were both born without a sin nature.
Adam sinned anyway.
Jesus did not.

It's not true that Jesus would have had to be born with a sin nature.
Temptation is possible even sans the sin nature.
His Father was the Holy Ghost,,,not Joseph.
Some believe the sin nature is passed on by the man...I'm not willing to debate this.
Romans 5:12

If OS were true then it makes man a innocent victim of sin rather than accountable perpetrator. How can one passively born with sin against his will be justly rightly condemned? Can one born without legs be justly rightly condemn for not walking?

OS gives man an excuse for his sins. OS makes God responsibile for men's sin

I do believe you have an incorrect understanding of O.S.
The above is not correct.
Man still has a choice as to whether or not to sin.

Adam and Eve were NOT sinners BEFORE breaking the law in eating of the forbidden tree. For sin is transgression of God's law not some idea passed from parents to child.

Agreed.

Neither are biblical. Nowhere in the OT were Jews taught the idea of OS nor did they believe in such an idea.

I never spoke about the O.T. and O.S.
Here is what I stated in post no. 231:


wondering said:
Total Depravity is calvinistic.
Original Sin is biblical and goes all the way back to the beginning of the church.
This is simple history.


The beginning of the church is NOT the O.T.
The beginning of the church means the beginning of the Christian church.

 

[JLB]

Romans 6 states that we re slaves to the one to whom we present ourselves.
Until we are born again,,,we present ourselves to satan..

After we are born again Christians, if we present ourselves, our physical bodies as instruments of unrighteousness we will eventually become a slave to that sin.


What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? Romans 6:15-16


Paul is speaking to people who are not under the law but under grace, the Spirit of grace, who have the ability to present themselves as slaves of righteousness.

We must make the choice to present their members, the members of their body as instruments of righteousness rather than instruments of unrighteousness.


And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. Romans 6:13-14



JLB

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Ephesians 2:3 says we are BY NATURE children of wrath.
The nature you refuse to accept, believing instead that we sin for no reason at all and that we suffer no effects from the sin of Adam.

Ephesians 2:3
3Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.

Romans 6 states that we re slaves to the one to whom we present ourselves.
Until we are born again,,,we present ourselves to satan..

Romans 6:16
16Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness?

This is the tendency we have toward sin until we are born again.

People sin because they choose to sin and are not forced to sin by some sin nature they were born with. Why do people choose to in? One reason is the is pleasure to found in sinning Heb 11:25.

Romans 6:16 people serve whom they choose to serve. People can choose to serve obedience unto righteousness as one can choose to serve sin unto death. Those Ephesians earlier in their life chose to serve sin unto death. Upon hearing the gospel they choose to serve obedience unto righteousness.

If people were born with a sin nature they would have an excuse for their sinning. Yet man is 'without excuse' Rom 1:20 for men are sinners for freely choosing to sin.

"Nature" can refer to how one is born. It can also refer to habitual practice of something over time. Paul never said those Ephesians were born sinners. He spoke of their own sinning (YOUR sins) and how they were responsible for thier own sinning having had habitually walked and lived in sin Eph 2:2-3.

Agreed.

I linked the Hebrew meaning of the word YOUTH. It's your choice to pay no attention to it.
It means from birth.

I cannot find in any translation where is it translated "birth". "IF" it means birth as claimed then why doesn't Gen 8:21 say birth? Birth and youth are two different times frames in life.
Secondly. sin is transgression of God's law. What law did a newborn transgress to make it a sinner? Tell a lie? Can't talk. Murder? No. Adultery? No. Infants are not able to sin, are not even accountable to God's law Rom 7:8-9.

I've posted scripture...could you please post a verse that says we are born innocent or lacking the sin nature?
From the N.T. please.

You have not posted a single verse that says infants are born sinners. Again, infants are not able to sin nor accountable to God Rom 7:8-9. If you insist infants are born sinners, then what law have they transgressed to make them sinners?

It can mean youth or it can mean from birth -- as an age factor.
If you're a scholar in the Hebrew language, then Biblehub's lexicon is incorrect.

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance: Hebrew 5271. נְעוּרִים (naur) -- youth, early life

Strong's Hebrew: 5271. נְעוּרִים (naur) -- Youth, young man

Above is link to Biblehub. I don't see where it is translated 'birth' anywhere.

I've NEVER said sin is imputed.
What I've said is that the EFFECT of original sin has passed from Adam to every generation after him.

Romans 5:12
12Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned—

Death spread through sin.
Adam was created not to die.
Now all men die because of his sin.
His sin is known as Original Sin.
His sin is not IMPUTED to us,,,,
but the EFFECTS of his sin spread through all mankind.

Rom 5:12 does NOT say death passed to all because Adam sinned. People read that idea into the verse. It does say death passed to all for because all sin which shows personal culpability and responsibility upon man committing his own sins.

Adam was created perfectly.
By the time of Noah, God decided that men were wicked.
What changed?
Original Sin entered into man.

Men were wicked for they choose to be wicked not because God decided them to be wicked.

Men are born with the sin nature,,,also called the flesh,,,some call carnality...


Romans 8:3-13

What do you believe THE FLESH means?

It does not mean men are born with a sin nature. Many verses speak to the sinfulness of man but NO VERSE says men were born sinful.

5For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit

A person follows what they set their mind to follow. Men are sinful for they choose to sin not forced to sin by some nature they were born with.

Mary was born sinless so that she could be the perfect mother of a sinless man....Jesus.
.

All are born sinless including Mary. Mary did not remain sinless, she needed a Saviour Luke 1:47. No immaculate conception found in the Bible, Catholics concede that:
“This point of doctrine [the immaculate conception] is not expressly dealt with anywhere in the Bible, nor was it preached by the Apostles, and for many centuries it was not mentioned at all by the Church. Gradually, however, as the idea of the future dogma began to develop among the faithful, theologians submitted the point to the closest examination, and finally, the view then generally prevailing was formally pronounced as a dogma of the Church by His Holiness Pope Pius IX in 1854” (p. 238)."

It's not true that Jesus would have had to be born with a sin nature.

If OS were true then Jesus would have been born with it:
Heb 2:17 " Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. "
Phil 2:7 " But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men "

If man is born a sinner, born with a sin nature so was Jesus else the Bible is not true

Heb 4:15 " For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. "

If Jesus was not born with a sin nature, then it cannot be true He was tempted in all points like we are.

I do believe you have an incorrect understanding of O.S.
The above is not correct.
Man still has a choice as to whether or not to sin.

So sinning is due to a choice not forced upon man by a 'sin nature' he was born with.

Agreed.

I never spoke about the O.T. and O.S.
Here is what I stated in post no. 231:


wondering said:
Total Depravity is calvinistic.
Original Sin is biblical and goes all the way back to the beginning of the church.
This is simple history.


The beginning of the church is NOT the O.T.
The beginning of the church means the beginning of the Christian church.

IF OS were true it would be just as true in the OT as NT. Nowhere were the Jews taught OS nor did they believe in the idea. Again, why would Paul go to great lengths in Romans chapters 2 and 3 to prove Jews were sinners if the Jews already believed they were born sinners? In Romans chapters 1 and 2 Paul proves all (Jew and Gentile) have sinned yet nowhere does Paul even remotely bring up the idea of OS. There would not be a more appropriate place to bring up OS than in Romans 1 and 2 in declaring all have sinned but OS is not there at all!!!!

 

[WIP]

You're forgetting about the age of accountability.
Babies and infants can't even sin.
Children sin all the time. Maybe you know some.
But they don't know THE RULES yet,,,,they don't know about God.
This is why they go to Catechism....Sunday School.
They learn that what they are doing is sin and that God does not accept sin.
Most kids don't even think they ever sin....I know this for a fact. I've taught our faith.

Once children know about sin and know about God,,,THEN we can say they are at the age of accountability. This could happen at 8 years old or it could happen at 13 years old,,,each child is different.

This idea you have of O.S. was taught by Augustine. At that time, the church accepted his teaching. The only reason I could think of, since the church did NOT believe what he taught (400AD) BEFORE him,,,is that he was so good at keeping heretical ideas from entering the church and it was important at his time since so much heresy was being taught by some persons.

Even the CC has accepted that babies do not need to be baptized immediately because of the fear that they would go to hell if they died. It's done today because old habits are hard to break.

Adult sinners know about sin and are accountable,,,this is why it wouldn't work for adults.

This we can be sure of: A person is born tainted,,,it does not happen when they first sin.
If this was true, then children would be responsible too because they DO sin - and to God sin is sin,,,,but He is a just and merciful God and knows that children cannot know about Him at an early age.

But how do we then reconcile what you say here with Romans 1:18-23?

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
(NKJV)

Is it possible that babies are actually born believers and then become fools? Any time I have talked with a toddler about God they don't seem to struggle with believing.

What is the age of accountability? Is it a certain number of years or something else?

Does it really rely on them being taught or is right and wrong now part of our nature for when Adam and Eve ate from the tree God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil." (Genesis 3:22 NKJV)

 

[GodsGrace]

People sin because they choose to sin and are not forced to sin by some sin nature they were born with. Why do people choose to in? One reason is the is pleasure to found in sinning Heb 11:25.

Romans 6:16 people serve whom they choose to serve. People can choose to serve obedience unto righteousness as one can choose to serve sin unto death. Those Ephesians earlier in their life chose to serve sin unto death. Upon hearing the gospel they choose to serve obedience unto righteousness.

If people were born with a sin nature they would have an excuse for their sinning. Yet man is 'without excuse' Rom 1:20 for men are sinners for freely choosing to sin.

"Nature" can refer to how one is born. It can also refer to habitual practice of something over time. Paul never said those Ephesians were born sinners. He spoke of their own sinning (YOUR sins) and how they were responsible for thier own sinning having had habitually walked and lived in sin Eph 2:2-3.



I cannot find in any translation where is it translated "birth". "IF" it means birth as claimed then why doesn't Gen 8:21 say birth? Birth and youth are two different times frames in life.
Secondly. sin is transgression of God's law. What law did a newborn transgress to make it a sinner? Tell a lie? Can't talk. Murder? No. Adultery? No. Infants are not able to sin, are not even accountable to God's law Rom 7:8-9.



You have not posted a single verse that says infants are born sinners. Again, infants are not able to sin nor accountable to God Rom 7:8-9. If you insist infants are born sinners, then what law have they transgressed to make them sinners?

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance: Hebrew 5271. נְעוּרִים (naur) -- youth, early life

Strong's Hebrew: 5271. נְעוּרִים (naur) -- Youth, young man

Above is link to Biblehub. I don't see where it is translated 'birth' anywhere.



Rom 5:12 does NOT say death passed to all because Adam sinned. People read that idea into the verse. It does say death passed to all for because all sin which shows personal culpability and responsibility upon man committing his own sins.



Men were wicked for they choose to be wicked not because God decided them to be wicked.



It does not mean men are born with a sin nature. Many verses speak to the sinfulness of man but NO VERSE says men were born sinful.

5For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit

A person follows what they set their mind to follow. Men are sinful for they choose to sin not forced to sin by some nature they were born with.



All are born sinless including Mary. Mary did not remain sinless, she needed a Saviour Luke 1:47. No immaculate conception found in the Bible, Catholics concede that:
“This point of doctrine [the immaculate conception] is not expressly dealt with anywhere in the Bible, nor was it preached by the Apostles, and for many centuries it was not mentioned at all by the Church. Gradually, however, as the idea of the future dogma began to develop among the faithful, theologians submitted the point to the closest examination, and finally, the view then generally prevailing was formally pronounced as a dogma of the Church by His Holiness Pope Pius IX in 1854” (p. 238)."



If OS were true then Jesus would have been born with it:
Heb 2:17 " Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. "
Phil 2:7 " But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men "

If man is born a sinner, born with a sin nature so was Jesus else the Bible is not true

Heb 4:15 " For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. "

If Jesus was not born with a sin nature, then it cannot be true He was tempted in all points like we are.





So sinning is due to a choice not forced upon man by a 'sin nature' he was born with.



IF OS were true it would be just as true in the OT as NT. Nowhere were the Jews taught OS nor did they believe in the idea. Again, why would Paul go to great lengths in Romans chapters 2 and 3 to prove Jews were sinners if the Jews already believed they were born sinners? In Romans chapters 1 and 2 Paul proves all (Jew and Gentile) have sinned yet nowhere does Paul even remotely bring up the idea of OS. There would not be a more appropriate place to bring up OS than in Romans 1 and 2 in declaring all have sinned but OS is not there at all!!!!

I will no longer be debating this with you.
You can believe what you will.
Where you learned all this incorrect Christian doctrine is a mystery to me...
but you're a saved person and that's what counts.

I never said babies are born SINNERS.
I said they are born with the sin nature.
If you don't understand the difference, then I'm really not willing to go on trying
to explain something you refuse to accept...which is fine with me.

As to the Hebrew link I had posted...
here it is again:

Genesis 8:21
21The LORD smelled the soothing aroma; and the LORD said to Himself, “I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done.

Youth: From the word na'ar --- Hebrew


Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
babe, boy, child, damsel, lad, servant, young man
From na'ar; (concretely) a boy (as active), from the age of infancy to adolescence; by implication, a servant; also (by interch. Of sex), a girl (of similar latitude in age) -- babe, boy, child, damsel (from the margin), lad, servant, young (man).

see HEBREW na'ar

source: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5288.htm


And I repeat....Mary and Jesus were NOT born with a sin nature.
Could God have sin in Him? That takes care of Hebrew's verse.

You also misunderstand Romans 1:19-20 about man being without excuse.

 

[GodsGrace]

But how do we then reconcile what you say here with Romans 1:18-23?

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools,
23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
(NKJV)

Is it possible that babies are actually born believers and then become fools? Any time I have talked with a toddler about God they don't seem to struggle with believing.

What is the age of accountability? Is it a certain number of years or something else?

Does it really rely on them being taught or is right and wrong now part of our nature for when Adam and Eve ate from the tree God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil." (Genesis 3:22 NKJV)

Babies are not born believers.
They are pliable and if they have good Christian parents, they could mold them in such a way as to believe in God and learn to love Him. This is not guaranteed, as I'm sure some of us here have 2 children and one might be saved but not the other. However, I do believe a parents influence counts for a lot.

As you've stated,,,right and wrong is now part of our nature.
Before Adam sinned they were innocent and knew only the good.
God would have wanted them to choose to remain that way.
He told them not to eat of the Tree of the KNOWLEDGE of good and evil.
After they ate,,,,they now knew both good and evil and lost their innocence.

Man is not imputed with the sin of Adam.
He suffers from the EFFECT of Adam's sin.
We no longer have the preternatural gifts God had given to Adam:
which are: Immortality, infused knowledge, a sinless nature.

Romans 1:18-23 has nothing to do with this discussion..absolutely nothing.

As to the age of accountability:
It changes from person to person.
I had an 8 year old girl in my class that was a believer. This is highly unusual.
I'd say that a person becomes aware of sin and their state at about the age of 12 to 15 or so.
We are not all the same.

Some never become aware....due to mental incapacity.
They are saved because they do not understand about sin.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I will no longer be debating this with you.
You can believe what you will.
Where you learned all this incorrect Christian doctrine is a mystery to me...
but you're a saved person and that's what counts.

I never said babies are born SINNERS.
I said they are born with the sin nature.
If you don't understand the difference, then I'm really not willing to go on trying
to explain something you refuse to accept...which is fine with me.

As to the Hebrew link I had posted...
here it is again:

Genesis 8:21
21The LORD smelled the soothing aroma; and the LORD said to Himself, “I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man’s heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done.

Youth: From the word na'ar --- Hebrew


Strong's Exhaustive Concordance
babe, boy, child, damsel, lad, servant, young man
From na'ar; (concretely) a boy (as active), from the age of infancy to adolescence; by implication, a servant; also (by interch. Of sex), a girl (of similar latitude in age) -- babe, boy, child, damsel (from the margin), lad, servant, young (man).

see HEBREW na'ar

source: https://biblehub.com/hebrew/5288.htm


And I repeat....Mary and Jesus were NOT born with a sin nature.
Could God have sin in Him? That takes care of Hebrew's verse.

You also misunderstand Romans 1:19-20 about man being without excuse.

1 John 3:4 "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law."

Rom 4:15 "Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression."

The Bible clearly shows that for a person to be a sinner;
1) law must exist (Rom 4:15)
2) that law must be transgressed (1 Jn 3:4)

What law of God have newborns transgressed to make them sinners?

You keep insisting that Gen 8:21 people are evil from birth, then what evil have newborns committed? How do you reconcile people being evil at birth with Rom 9:11 "(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil,...."

(Don't forget Rom 7:8-9 where Paul shows infants are not accountable to God's laws, therefore sin has no power over infants, sin is dead to infants)

 

[JLB]

People sin because they choose to sin and are not forced to sin by some sin nature they were born with. Why do people choose to in? One reason is the is pleasure to found in sinning Heb 11:25.

Romans 6:16 people serve whom they choose to serve. People can choose to serve obedience unto righteousness as one can choose to serve sin unto death. Those Ephesians earlier in their life chose to serve sin unto death. Upon hearing the gospel they choose to serve obedience unto righteousness.

If people were born with a sin nature they would have an excuse for their sinning. Yet man is 'without excuse' Rom 1:20 for men are sinners for freely choosing to sin.

"Nature" can refer to how one is born. It can also refer to habitual practice of something over time. Paul never said those Ephesians were born sinners. He spoke of their own sinning (YOUR sins) and how they were responsible for thier own sinning having had habitually walked and lived in sin Eph 2:2-3.



I cannot find in any translation where is it translated "birth". "IF" it means birth as claimed then why doesn't Gen 8:21 say birth? Birth and youth are two different times frames in life.
Secondly. sin is transgression of God's law. What law did a newborn transgress to make it a sinner? Tell a lie? Can't talk. Murder? No. Adultery? No. Infants are not able to sin, are not even accountable to God's law Rom 7:8-9.



You have not posted a single verse that says infants are born sinners. Again, infants are not able to sin nor accountable to God Rom 7:8-9. If you insist infants are born sinners, then what law have they transgressed to make them sinners?

Strong's Exhaustive Concordance: Hebrew 5271. נְעוּרִים (naur) -- youth, early life

Strong's Hebrew: 5271. נְעוּרִים (naur) -- Youth, young man

Above is link to Biblehub. I don't see where it is translated 'birth' anywhere.



Rom 5:12 does NOT say death passed to all because Adam sinned. People read that idea into the verse. It does say death passed to all for because all sin which shows personal culpability and responsibility upon man committing his own sins.



Men were wicked for they choose to be wicked not because God decided them to be wicked.



It does not mean men are born with a sin nature. Many verses speak to the sinfulness of man but NO VERSE says men were born sinful.

5For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit

A person follows what they set their mind to follow. Men are sinful for they choose to sin not forced to sin by some nature they were born with.



All are born sinless including Mary. Mary did not remain sinless, she needed a Saviour Luke 1:47. No immaculate conception found in the Bible, Catholics concede that:
“This point of doctrine [the immaculate conception] is not expressly dealt with anywhere in the Bible, nor was it preached by the Apostles, and for many centuries it was not mentioned at all by the Church. Gradually, however, as the idea of the future dogma began to develop among the faithful, theologians submitted the point to the closest examination, and finally, the view then generally prevailing was formally pronounced as a dogma of the Church by His Holiness Pope Pius IX in 1854” (p. 238)."



If OS were true then Jesus would have been born with it:
Heb 2:17 " Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. "
Phil 2:7 " But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men "

If man is born a sinner, born with a sin nature so was Jesus else the Bible is not true

Heb 4:15 " For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. "

If Jesus was not born with a sin nature, then it cannot be true He was tempted in all points like we are.





So sinning is due to a choice not forced upon man by a 'sin nature' he was born with.



IF OS were true it would be just as true in the OT as NT. Nowhere were the Jews taught OS nor did they believe in the idea. Again, why would Paul go to great lengths in Romans chapters 2 and 3 to prove Jews were sinners if the Jews already believed they were born sinners? In Romans chapters 1 and 2 Paul proves all (Jew and Gentile) have sinned yet nowhere does Paul even remotely bring up the idea of OS. There would not be a more appropriate place to bring up OS than in Romans 1 and 2 in declaring all have sinned but OS is not there at all!!!!

Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. Romans 5:18-19

• as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation,

• For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners

Each person has a physical body that is tainted with sin, that all mankind inherited from Adam.


Jesus had to be born of a virgin so His body was conceived without sin.


We have sin that dwells in our physical body because we were born with it. We continue to have sin that dwells in our physical body even after we are born again.


That why we must “crucify” our flesh daily.

We must put to death the sinful deeds of the flesh.


Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. Romans 8:12-13

• if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body

Sin is imbedded in our physical body because of Adam’s transgression, as it spread to all mankind.

• as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation,

O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.
There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 7:24-8:1


Sin is in our bodies because we inherited it from Adam.

Sin does not become imbedded in our bodies because we sin, but rather we sin, because there is sin in our physical bodies that desires to rule over us, thus making us its slave.


Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?
Romans 6:16



JLB

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. Romans 5:18-19

• as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation,

• For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners

Each person has a physical body that is tainted with sin, that all mankind inherited from Adam.


Jesus had to be born of a virgin so His body was conceived without sin.


We have sin that dwells in our physical body because we were born with it. We continue to have sin that dwells in our physical body even after we are born again.


That why we must “crucify” our flesh daily.

We must put to death the sinful deeds of the flesh.


Therefore, brethren, we are debtors—not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. Romans 8:12-13

• if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body

Sin is imbedded in our physical body because of Adam’s transgression, as it spread to all mankind.

• as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation,

O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? I thank God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.
There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 7:24-8:1


Sin is in our bodies because we inherited it from Adam.

Sin does not become imbedded in our bodies because we sin, but rather we sin, because there is sin in our physical bodies that desires to rule over us, thus making us its slave.


Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?
Romans 6:16



JLB

Those that support the idea of OS only want to look at the first part of the verses in Rom 5:18-19 and dismiss the second part.

Rom 5:19
(a) For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,
(b) so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

If it is true many were UNCONDITIONALLY made sinners by Adam then it is equally true that same many shall UNCONDITIONALLY made righteous by Christ and you have Universalism in salvation.

No one is UNCONDITIONALLY made a sinner no more than anyone is UNCONDITIONALLY made righteous. We cannot call a person a sinner who has never sinned no more than we can call a person righteous who has never done any righteousness. Rom 9:11 a point Paul is making here is to show God's choice between Jacob and Esau was totally a sovereign choice on God's part and not based upon anything the twins had done. It therefore cannot be said God chose Jacob for good he had done and not Esau for evil he had done. Neither has done any good or evil, both were basically a blank slate making God's choice a purely sovereign choice. Can't call a "blank slate" evil when its done no evil no more than you can call a "blank slate" righteous when its done no righteousness.

Rom 5:18
(a)Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation;
(b) even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

--"all men" refers to the same people both times

--"all men" are on the receiving end of condemnation and justification

--if "all men" are unconditionally condemned as a result of Adam's sinful offence then that same 'all men' will be unconditionally justified by the righteous actions of Christ. Universalism again.

Since Paul is not teaching Universalism, I see that all Paul is showing is that the benefits of Christ's righteousness in obediently going to the cross (salvation) is available to all men who been affected by sin since it entered the world though Adam's sinful offence (condemnation). This verse not only refutes the Calvinistic idea of OS it also refutes the idea of limited atonement.
"ALL MAN" receive condemnation for they have CONDITIONALLY sinned, but Christ's provides a remedy (justification) for that same ALL MEN who CONDITIONALLY have faith. Again, no one is UNconditionally made a sinner no more than anyone is UNconditionally made righteous.


Does not matter if Mary were a virgin or not, if all men are born with OS then Jesus would have been born with it too. Catholics developed the idea of immaculate conception (not in the Bible) to get around this problem OS has created. It seems from some websites that Protestants are trying to argue OS is passed only thru the father. It has not been proven OS exists much less passed through the father. Eze chapter 18 refutes this idea and a so called "proof text" of Psa 51:5 only mentions the mother.

OS defines sin the exact opposite from the Bible. The Bible shows that sin is "transgression of the law" and the "soul that sinneth it shall die". Sin only exists if a person commits a transgression and each person is accountable for his/her own transgression.
Yet OS seems to define sin as an idea that is passed from one person A to person B even if person B has not even sinned making Person B accountable for Person's A sin.

Who a person serves (sin or righteousness) is by choice. A man can easily choose to serve one as the other Gen 4:7 making men justly and rightly culpable for the choice they make. If OS is true and men are born with a sin nature causing men to sin against their will then God cannot rightly justly hold men accountable for the sinful nature God has allowed man to have and man becomes a passive, innocent victim of sin rather than a willful, accountable, perpetrator of sin. No one on judgement day can make the excuse 'the devil made me do it" or 'my sin nature made me do it". You sin because you willfully chose to sin, nothing made you sin against your will.

 

[JLB]

Those that support the idea of OS only want to look at the first part of the verses in Rom 5:18-19 and dismiss the second part.

I don’t know about anyone else, or some doctrine that another person teaches.

I am accountable to God for what I promote as truth; as the doctrine of Christ.


I’m looking at all of the scriptures and the context.


Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous. Romans 5:18-19

• as through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation,

• For as by
• one man’s disobedience many were made sinners

Other scriptures or verse in Romans 5 or anywhere else in the Bible is not going to change what these verse teach.


The “one” sin of Adam has spread to all mankind.


That is a DNA level event.

Adams bloodline carries on to all men.

Sin has spread to all men through the reproduction process.

We sin because our physical body contains sin that is inherited from our father.


JLB