Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Is obeying the Lord and His Commandments required for salvation?

Is obeying the Lord required for salvation?


  • Total voters
    27
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

The problem OS supporters have with Rom 5:18-19 is they assume OS into the first half of those verses creating problems with the second half of the verse.

These verses are like if-then type statements -- if it is true all are UNconditonally made sinners by Adam, then it is equally true all will UNCONDITIONALLY be made righteous by Christ.


I do not agree that sin is some kind of substance found within the body or the blood nor that sin is just an idea passed from one person to another. Biblically a transgression must take place for sin to exist.

Eze 18 refutes many of the ideas about OS:

"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? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die."

Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. 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: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

(Free will in choosing to obey or not, not forced by sin nature to only do wrong)
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live."

(The Bible does speak about forgiveness of of people's own transgression. Nowhere do I find the Bible teach forgiveness of OS)

(2) The Concept of Forgiveness. The word of God does not describe the forgiveness of inherited sin. It does not mention forgiveness of the "guilt" of original sin. The New Testament speaks of "your sins" and of "thy sins" (Acts 3:19; 22:16). One is forgiven of his own acts of transgression, iniquity and disobedience. "For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more" (Hebrews 8:12). "The body of the sins of the flesh" are put off, cut away, when God forgives (Colossians 2:11-13). As the sins are those one commits, the forgiveness applies to those sins. If as the doctrine of original sin avers, all men are born guilty of Adam's sin, why is the Bible devoid of any reference to the forgiveness of it?
 
These verses are like if-then type statements -- if it is true all are UNconditonally made sinners by Adam, then it is equally true all will UNCONDITIONALLY be made righteous by Christ.

Paul in his legal argument, says in the verse you are referring to, .... “many” —. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.

This is because there are some exceptions.


JLB
 
The problem OS supporters have with Rom 5:18-19 is they assume OS into the first half of those verses creating problems with the second half of the verse.

These verses are like if-then type statements -- if it is true all are UNconditonally made sinners by Adam, then it is equally true all will UNCONDITIONALLY be made righteous by Christ.


I do not agree that sin is some kind of substance found within the body or the blood nor that sin is just an idea passed from one person to another. Biblically a transgression must take place for sin to exist.

Eze 18 refutes many of the ideas about OS:

"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? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die."

Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. 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: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

(Free will in choosing to obey or not, not forced by sin nature to only do wrong)
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live."

(The Bible does speak about forgiveness of of people's own transgression. Nowhere do I find the Bible teach forgiveness of OS)

(2) The Concept of Forgiveness. The word of God does not describe the forgiveness of inherited sin. It does not mention forgiveness of the "guilt" of original sin. The New Testament speaks of "your sins" and of "thy sins" (Acts 3:19; 22:16). One is forgiven of his own acts of transgression, iniquity and disobedience. "For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more" (Hebrews 8:12). "The body of the sins of the flesh" are put off, cut away, when God forgives (Colossians 2:11-13). As the sins are those one commits, the forgiveness applies to those sins. If as the doctrine of original sin avers, all men are born guilty of Adam's sin, why is the Bible devoid of any reference to the forgiveness of it?
You don't seem to want to understand that something has to MAKE US sin.
Your idea that it's FUN to sin is poorly thought through.
Most sin is NOT fun and only the lawless, even secular ones, think that sin if fun.
Like those that steal for fun, for instance. Those that do not sweat as they pick up what they wish to steal.

We do NOT inherit sin.
We are only responsible for our personal sin....
which is why babies don't go to hell when they die...
because they are not capable of sin.

We inherit the EFFECT of sin....
which is a nature we are born with.

Please explain how Adam was before and after he sinned.
When Abel and Cain were born...were they the same as Adam was
BEFORE or AFTER he sinned?
 
The problem OS supporters have with Rom 5:18-19 is they assume OS into the first half of those verses creating problems with the second half of the verse.

These verses are like if-then type statements -- if it is true all are UNconditonally made sinners by Adam, then it is equally true all will UNCONDITIONALLY be made righteous by Christ.


I do not agree that sin is some kind of substance found within the body or the blood nor that sin is just an idea passed from one person to another. Biblically a transgression must take place for sin to exist.

Eze 18 refutes many of the ideas about OS:

"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? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die."

Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live. 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: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."

(Free will in choosing to obey or not, not forced by sin nature to only do wrong)
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live."

(The Bible does speak about forgiveness of of people's own transgression. Nowhere do I find the Bible teach forgiveness of OS)

(2) The Concept of Forgiveness. The word of God does not describe the forgiveness of inherited sin. It does not mention forgiveness of the "guilt" of original sin. The New Testament speaks of "your sins" and of "thy sins" (Acts 3:19; 22:16). One is forgiven of his own acts of transgression, iniquity and disobedience. "For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more" (Hebrews 8:12). "The body of the sins of the flesh" are put off, cut away, when God forgives (Colossians 2:11-13). As the sins are those one commits, the forgiveness applies to those sins. If as the doctrine of original sin avers, all men are born guilty of Adam's sin, why is the Bible devoid of any reference to the forgiveness of it?
§Above you state this:
These verses are like if-then type statements -- if it is true all are UNconditonally made sinners by Adam, then it is equally true all will UNCONDITIONALLY be made righteous by Christ.

What you've posted is incorrect,,,and this is due to your misunderstanding of O.S.
Original Sin only refers to Adam's sin.
We suffer from the effect of this sin.
We are not imputed with it.

There is none righteous...no, not one.
Romans (sorry, I'm not posting verses,,,no time)

This is because through ONE MAN we are all born with the effect of his sin....
which is called O.S.

That is EVERYONE.

However, not everyone will be saved.
John 3:16
Those that believe in the Son will be saved.
Those that are born again and obey God will be saved.

There are conditions to being saved.

We are human and are all sons of Adam.
But we cannot all be Sons of God unless we WANT to be.
This is due to our free will,,,,it has to be OUR CHOICE.
To be a Son of God we must REPENT.
Turn away from our sinful selves and turn toward God and present
ourselves a living sacrifice...Romans 12:1
 
You don't seem to want to understand that something has to MAKE US sin.
Your idea that it's FUN to sin is poorly thought through.
Most sin is NOT fun and only the lawless, even secular ones, think that sin if fun.
Like those that steal for fun, for instance. Those that do not sweat as they pick up what they wish to steal.

I don't agree that man has to be MADE to sin against his will. All that was needed for Adam to sin was a law (thou shalt not) and a free will to transgress that law and he became a sinner. Adam was not created with sin, a sin nature or totally depraved but still able to sin meaning OS, sin nature, total depravity are not mandatory for one to become a sinner.

You say sin is not fun but I think many will disagree with you on that...."Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;" Heb 11:25

wondering said:
We do NOT inherit sin.
I agree. Those that believe in OS do not agree with your statement here.

wondering said:
We are only responsible for our personal sin....

I agree again. But OS would make one responsible for Adam's sin.

wondering said:
which is why babies don't go to hell when they die...
because they are not capable of sin.

I agree again.

wondering said:
We inherit the EFFECT of sin....
which is a nature we are born with.

Not sure what you mean by "EFFECT of sin".

We all physically die as a CONSEQUENCE of Adam sinning and not because we inherit his sin. Just as someone killed by a drunk driver, that person died as a CONSEQUENCE of the drunk driver's sin but does not inherit the drunk driver's sin therefore not accountable for the drunk driver's sins.

wondering said:
Please explain how Adam was before and after he sinned.
When Abel and Cain were born...were they the same as Adam was
BEFORE or AFTER he sinned?

Before Adam sinned he was innocent and sinless before God and spiritually alive. After he sinned he died spiritually.

Abel and Cain when they were born they were like Adam before he sinned being innocent and without sin before God. But when they followed in the footsteps of their father and sinned then they spiritually died too.

Just as Adam was able to sin without having a sin nature or totally depraved all he had to do was break a law of God by choice. Cain and Abel likewise were not born with a sin nature/total depravity but just used their free will to break a law of God and they became sinners. You and I were not born with sin nor a sin nature nor totally depraved but born with a free will given to us by God and when we choose to transgress God's law we became sinners just like Adam Cain and Able by doing just as they did...choose to sin.


So I am not understanding why people have to have something 'special' or some kind of "effect" to be able to sin when all they need to sin is a law and free will to choose to break that law and bang...they are now a sinner.
 
Paul in his legal argument, says in the verse you are referring to, .... “many” —. For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s obedience many will be made righteous.

This is because there are some exceptions.


JLB
Maybe Paul wrote 'many' were made sinners because all who are born will not become sinners, many will die as infants and not become sinners, many will be born with severe mental disabilities and not become a sinner.

'Many' will be made righteous but not all will be saved for many will be lost.
 
Maybe Paul wrote 'many' were made sinners because all who are born will not become sinners, many will die as infants and not become sinners, many will be born with severe mental disabilities and not become a sinner.

'Many' will be made righteous but not all will be saved for many will be lost.
I found the following commentator's comments on "many"; (my emp)

R. L. Whiteside:
"The many" here includes all that arrive at the years of responsibility. Paul does not say how these were made sinners by the disobedience of Adam, nor how they are to be made righteous by the obedience of Christ. It is pure assumption to argue that the disobedience of Adam is imputed to his offspring, or that the obedience of Christ is imputed to anybody. Neither guilt nor personal righteousness can be transferred from one person to another; but the consequences of either, to some extent, may fall upon others."
"A New Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Saints at Rome" p. 125
 
I found the following commentator's comments on "many"; (my emp)

R. L. Whiteside:
"The many" here includes all that arrive at the years of responsibility. Paul does not say how these were made sinners by the disobedience of Adam, nor how they are to be made righteous by the obedience of Christ. It is pure assumption to argue that the disobedience of Adam is imputed to his offspring, or that the obedience of Christ is imputed to anybody. Neither guilt nor personal righteousness can be transferred from one person to another; but the consequences of either, to some extent, may fall upon others."
"A New Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Saints at Rome" p. 125
Some commentary Ernest T. Bass!!!!!
This would mean that we are NOT covered by Christ and we are NOT His righteousness and that we must be saved by our own hard work, go to confession, and follow the commandments to a T.

The MANY that arrive at the years of responsibility are the ones I've been referring to as the Age of Responsibility....same thing.

Also, NO ONE on this forum has EVER said that we are imputed the sin of Adam.
No man is responsible for the sin of another. In a different post you made a comment about the EFFECT of Adam's sin...I'll get to that after this.

Just please notice that in the above commentary the author says that CHRIST'S obedience is not imputed to anyone. TAKE NOTE...this is extremely important. You fought me tooth and nail regarding this in the obedience or fulfillment thread.

The reason I dislike commentaries is because we are learning the teaching of ONE MAN.
I have very very rarely used a commentary because we each can find one that will agree with us because the opinions are so varied.

I prefer to learn from a denomination...I've attended two and they agree with each other on almost all doctrine---one having more doctrine than the other and some that may not be scriptural but that is EXTRA teachings and do not conflict with the other denomination.

Another thing I do is to read the same verse (if it's not clear) in different versions...this also helps.

You see that the commentator does say that the consequences of some fall on others....this happened with Adam...but now to the other post.....
 
Maybe Paul wrote 'many' were made sinners because all who are born will not become sinners, many will die as infants and not become sinners, many will be born with severe mental disabilities and not become a sinner.

'Many' will be made righteous but not all will be saved for many will be lost.
P.S. At that time...the word many was used to mean all at times.

For instance:
MANY are called, but few are chosen.

Sounds very calvinistic, doesn't it?
Well, it's not. It was just a way of speaking.
It was TWO THOUSAND years ago....
 
I don't agree that man has to be MADE to sin against his will. All that was needed for Adam to sin was a law (thou shalt not) and a free will to transgress that law and he became a sinner. Adam was not created with sin, a sin nature or totally depraved but still able to sin meaning OS, sin nature, total depravity are not mandatory for one to become a sinner.
E...no one is saying man is MADE TO SIN. Especially against his will.
I think this is such an important topic because it helped me a great deal to understand the nature of man. If we can latch on to that, it helps to understand why men behave the way they do. It helped me to understand why some persons are so unkind and why some get themselves into so much trouble. It helped me to understand my children and raise them in a much better way.

What I wish you would do is forget a little bit, for the time being, about the law. There was always a law despite what Paul says in Romans....we can't get into that here...and man has always disobeyed the law....let's find out why.

Adam was NOT created with a sin nature...he was created perfectly.
Eve was DECEIVED by satan...we are not deceived; we know about sin.
Adam also ate and the reasons could be varied.

No one is born TOTALLY DEPRAVED...this is a calvinistic doctrine which is incorrect but you do seem to get a lot of calvinistic ideas into your arguments. NO ONE on this thread said we are born totally depraved or even depraved.

Original Sin only means what Adam did...the sin HE committed. Forget every other meaning for a while and then we could get back to it. As I've said, the meaning changed in 400AD,,,but this is not important for us.

You say sin is not fun but I think many will disagree with you on that...."Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;" Heb 11:25
Sin might feel good for a while, but any intelligent person, even a non-believer, knows that it is not fun. Think of an alcoholic. It might be fun to get drunk every now and then, I wouldn't really know, but is it fun when it turns a life upside down and ruins families?

Any other sin you can think of will work out about the same.


I agree. Those that believe in OS do not agree with your statement here.



I agree again. But OS would make one responsible for Adam's sin.
OK. What you're agreeing to in both cases is that a person is NOT responsible for the sin of another. No one is imputed with the sin of another. We are all responsible for our own sins.



I agree again.
You agree that babies cannot go to hell because babies cannot sin.
OK.



Not sure what you mean by "EFFECT of sin".

We all physically die as a CONSEQUENCE of Adam sinning and not because we inherit his sin. Just as someone killed by a drunk driver, that person died as a CONSEQUENCE of the drunk driver's sin but does not inherit the drunk driver's sin therefore not accountable for the drunk driver's sins.
What I mean by the EFFECT of Adam's sin is what you describe above.
Adam's sin is his alone..but we suffer from the effect, or consequence of it.
He was immortal and lost that when he sinned...we also lost it.
He had infused knowledge but lost that when he sinned....we also lost it.

Adam, being the father of all men...passed on the consequences of his sin.
God banished Adam from the Garden...he was no longer pure.
He passed this impurity to all of his offspring.
This impurity is known as the sin nature.
We are impure.
We have the sin nature due to Adam's sin.
We are born with it.
A baby has the sin nature....
but he cannot sin.
When he gets to be about 2 years old he does sin...he might tell a lie, or throw something at another toddler....but he is NOT RESPONSIBLE for that sin because he does not know he's sinning.
If YOU commit a sin you are not aware of, you also are not responsible for it.

As the toddler grows, at some point he DOES become aware of God and sin and then knowingly will commit sin....at this point he will be responsible for his sin.

But what makes us sin? Of course we have free will...but what makes us not obey God?
It's the sin nature we're born with...it's the impurity we've gotten from Adam.
NOT Adam's sin....
His IMPURITY.


Before Adam sinned he was innocent and sinless before God and spiritually alive. After he sinned he died spiritually.
He died spiritually but eventually he also died physically.
He became impure.

Abel and Cain when they were born they were like Adam before he sinned being innocent and without sin before God. But when they followed in the footsteps of their father and sinned then they spiritually died too.
This is not the accepted Christian belief.
Abel and Cain were born impure just as their father was. Adam's actual DNA became impure and imperfect. They were NOT born innocent. They were born impure, with the sin nature. They were born spiritually dead and had to become alive at the age of responsibility...and they also physically died due to Adam's sin causing impurity in the human race.

Just as Adam was able to sin without having a sin nature or totally depraved all he had to do was break a law of God by choice. Cain and Abel likewise were not born with a sin nature/total depravity but just used their free will to break a law of God and they became sinners. You and I were not born with sin nor a sin nature nor totally depraved but born with a free will given to us by God and when we choose to transgress God's law we became sinners just like Adam Cain and Able by doing just as they did...choose to sin.
This sounds good and reasonable.
But was Adam not the father of all men? As per Romans..as through one man sin entered into the world....we have death because of this sin....and it spread to all men...because Adam is the father of all men. Romans 5,,,but they did not die because of THEIR individual sin but because of Adam's sin.


So I am not understanding why people have to have something 'special' or some kind of "effect" to be able to sin when all they need to sin is a law and free will to choose to break that law and bang...they are now a sinner.
Men need a law to transgress and they need free will and they are held hostage by satan because we all are born impure and this is known as the sin nature. This is why it's necessary to become saved....because we're born lost.

When we become born again this sin nature is made submissive to §God and we will still sin but much much less because we love Jesus and with the help of the Holy Spirit we are able to walk away from sin many times. But not always, right? Why not? Do you still find pleasure in sinning? No! It's because sometimes we will succumb to our old nature,,,the old nature Paul speaks of. Ephesians 2:3, Romans 6:6 and more....

So we're born with this impurity,,,this sin nature.
We are not responsible for it until the age of accountability.

If you wish to go over the doctrine of Original Sin,,,I'd be happy to do that too.
 
Some commentary Ernest T. Bass!!!!!
This would mean that we are NOT covered by Christ and we are NOT His righteousness and that we must be saved by our own hard work, go to confession, and follow the commandments to a T.

The MANY that arrive at the years of responsibility are the ones I've been referring to as the Age of Responsibility....same thing.

Also, NO ONE on this forum has EVER said that we are imputed the sin of Adam.
No man is responsible for the sin of another. In a different post you made a comment about the EFFECT of Adam's sin...I'll get to that after this.

Just please notice that in the above commentary the author says that CHRIST'S obedience is not imputed to anyone. TAKE NOTE...this is extremely important. You fought me tooth and nail regarding this in the obedience or fulfillment thread.

The reason I dislike commentaries is because we are learning the teaching of ONE MAN.
I have very very rarely used a commentary because we each can find one that will agree with us because the opinions are so varied.

I prefer to learn from a denomination...I've attended two and they agree with each other on almost all doctrine---one having more doctrine than the other and some that may not be scriptural but that is EXTRA teachings and do not conflict with the other denomination.

Another thing I do is to read the same verse (if it's not clear) in different versions...this also helps.

You see that the commentator does say that the consequences of some fall on others....this happened with Adam...but now to the other post.....
No one will be saved by doing their own work (self-righteousness) but saved by being obedient to God's righteousness.

Rom 10:3 "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God."

Those Jews were lost for doing their OWN righteousness and not obeying God's righteousness.

==========

I used the commentary to back my point as to why Paul used the word "many". Paul said 'many' were made sinners for all will not be sinners. Infants that die as infants, the severely disabled. Christ...none of these are sinners.

==========

Christ's righteousness is NOT imputed/transferred to the sinner nor is the sinner's sin imputed/transferred to Christ. That's Calvinism.

=========

The Bible teaches one body, one faith (Eph 4:4-5) not denominationalism.
 
P.S. At that time...the word many was used to mean all at times.

For instance:
MANY are called, but few are chosen.

Sounds very calvinistic, doesn't it?
Well, it's not. It was just a way of speaking.
It was TWO THOUSAND years ago....
I believe in the context (Mt 22:14) many refers to the Jews, the ones who were first called to the 'party'. The gospel was to go to the Jew first then the Gentile (Rom 1:16) but most Jews rejected it a, just few (a remnant-Rom 11:5) believed and obeyed Acts 2:38. Then the Gentiles were called from the 'highways' v10. Those 'chosen' were the ones that answered the call in obedience. The gospel is for all, men are called by the gospel (2 Thess 2:14) but only those that respond and put on the 'wedding clothes' (obey) are chosen.
 
I believe in the context (Mt 22:14) many refers to the Jews, the ones who were first called to the 'party'. The gospel was to go to the Jew first then the Gentile (Rom 1:16) but most Jews rejected it a, just few (a remnant-Rom 11:5) believed and obeyed Acts 2:38. Then the Gentiles were called from the 'highways' v10. Those 'chosen' were the ones that answered the call in obedience. The gospel is for all, men are called by the gospel (2 Thess 2:14) but only those that respond and put on the 'wedding clothes' (obey) are chosen.
I don't know if you missed my post no. 271 or if you just don't care to reply.
It's fine if you don't.

As you know, I agree that babies and the impaired are not sinners.
This is because they are not responsible.


1594497083617.png
 
What I wish you would do is forget a little bit, for the time being, about the law. There was always a law despite what Paul says in Romans....we can't get into that here...and man has always disobeyed the law....let's find out why.

Rom 4:14 "For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:"
Rom 4:15 "Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression."

V14 "they which are of the law" - Paul is speaking about those who want to keep the OT law of Moses. That OT law required strict, flawless law keeping to be justified. If being made heirs is dependent upon perfect, flawless law keeping then faith is void/worthless and the promise is no effect for no one could ever keep the law perfectly.

V15 'the law worketh wrath' means all the OT law did was condemn, it showed no mercy. Paul then shows the only way for humans to perfectly sinless is by not having any law at all to transgress.

Therefore Paul is not saying there was never any law but his point is the only way for humans to avoid transgression would be by having no law.

My point in quoting Rom 4:15 and 1 Jn 3:4 is to give a Bible definition of sin. According to the Bible, in order for sin to exist there (1) must be law and (2) an accountable person must transgress that law. Hence sin is NOT a substance or an idea passed from one person to another but sin is a transgression against God's law. No one is born having transgressed God's law (Rom 9:11) therefore no one is born a sinner.


wondering said:
Adam was NOT created with a sin nature...he was created perfectly.
Eve was DECEIVED by satan...we are not deceived; we know about sin.
Adam also ate and the reasons could be varied.

No one is born TOTALLY DEPRAVED...this is a calvinistic doctrine which is incorrect but you do seem to get a lot of calvinistic ideas into your arguments. NO ONE on this thread said we are born totally depraved or even depraved.

I agree Adam was not created with sin nor with a sin nature nor totally depraved...but yet he was still capable of sinning. All that is needed for a person to sin is a law and a free will to choose and break that law. So again a sin nature or totally depravity is not necessary for one to be a sinner. We today are sinners by following in Adam's step in using our free will to transgress God's NT law/commands. So we do not need to inherit sin or sin nature from Adam to be sinners as some people may think.

wondering said:
Original Sin only means what Adam did...the sin HE committed. Forget every other meaning for a while and then we could get back to it. As I've said, the meaning changed in 400AD,,,but this is not important for us.


Sin might feel good for a while, but any intelligent person, even a non-believer, knows that it is not fun. Think of an alcoholic. It might be fun to get drunk every now and then, I wouldn't really know, but is it fun when it turns a life upside down and ruins families?

Any other sin you can think of will work out about the same.

There is pleasure, that is a reason why people sin but sin is deceptive. What is pleasurable now will bring trouble later. As I have heard it said about sin being deceptive is that sin will take a person farther than they wanted to go, cost them more that what they can afford to pay and not bring true fulfillment sin lead them to believe it would.



wondering said:
OK. What you're agreeing to in both cases is that a person is NOT responsible for the sin of another. No one is imputed with the sin of another. We are all responsible for our own sins.
Yep.

wondering said:
You agree that babies cannot go to hell because babies cannot sin.
OK.
Yep.



wondering said:
What I mean by the EFFECT of Adam's sin is what you describe above.
Adam's sin is his alone..but we suffer from the effect, or consequence of it.

More or less this is what I have been saying.....we do NOT inherit Adam's sin but we sure do have to deal with the consequence of Adam's sin. We will all physically die as a consequence of Adam sin NOT because we inherit Adam's sin. Those that die as infants dies as a consequence of Adam's sin not because they inherited Adam's sin. Jesus came into this world in all aspects like a human meaning He would also die physically as we all do as a consequence of Adam sinning not because He inherited Adam's sin.

An example I used earlier where a drink driver crashes into another vehicle killing those in that vehicle. They suffered the consequence of the drunk driver's sin but do not inherit the drunk driver's sin.

wondering said:
As the toddler grows, at some point he DOES become aware of God and sin and then knowingly will commit sin....at this point he will be responsible for his sin.

Yes, as they mature mentally they learn right from wrong THEN sin springs up them (Rom 7:9) when they choose to do wrong.

wondering said:
But what makes us sin? Of course we have free will...but what makes us not obey God?

Free will in choosing to not obey God is why men disobey God. Again, we agreed that Adam had no sin nature, no totally depravity. Yet he was still able to sin because he had free will and chose to sin. And since Adam did not need a sin nature to sin we do not need it either for we like Adam can use our free will to sin.

(I am seeing we will never agree on this)


wondering said:
They were born impure, with the sin nature. They were born spiritually dead and had to become alive at the age of responsibility...and they also physically died due to Adam's sin causing impurity in the human race.

Adam was not created impure nor was Cain and Able born sinners. They sinned just like Adam in using their free will to sin. DNA is an object like a door knob, neither are sinful. There is no sin DNA, no sin gene. Some falsely claim people are born homosexuals. If that were the case then they cannot be rightly justly condemned by man or God. But the fact is they sin the sin of homosexuality for those CHOOSE to commit that sin therefore are accountable, culpable for their free will choice as we all are. Yet some repent CHOOSING to start doing righteousness.

Again in Rom 7:8-9 Paul shows that he was not with sin but sin was something that sprang up in him later in life when leaned right and wrong, God's commandments.

Again I see we will never agree on this.


wondering said:
Men need a law to transgress and they need free will and they are held hostage by satan because we all are born impure and this is known as the sin nature. This is why it's necessary to become saved....because we're born lost.

Again Adam was not created impure but was still able sin for all it takes to sin is a law and free will to choose and transgress that law. Therefore we do not need to be born with a sin nature for all we need is law and choose to transgress that law.

wondering said:
When we become born again this sin nature is made submissive to §God and we will still sin but much much less because we love Jesus and with the help of the Holy Spirit we are able to walk away from sin many times. But not always, right? Why not? Do you still find pleasure in sinning? No! It's because sometimes we will succumb to our old nature,,,the old nature Paul speaks of. Ephesians 2:3, Romans 6:6 and more....

So we're born with this impurity,,,this sin nature.
We are not responsible for it until the age of accountability.

If you wish to go over the doctrine of Original Sin,,,I'd be happy to do that too.
Nowhere ever does Paul say men are born with a sin nature.

Again Adam did not need a sin nature to sin and neither do we. Nor was Adam born with sin neither are we. The idea of OS did not come from Christ His Apostles nor any Bible writer but was a false idea that came from uninspired men as Augustine Luther and Calvin. OS was never taught the Jews in the OT nor did they believe such an idea. The earlier church did not teach or believe it. OS was a corruption that did not show up till about the 5th century.[/quote][/quote][/QUOTE]
 
(my emp)

"This question (original sin) was not much debated for the first 3 centuries following the revelation of the gospel. It was commonly believed that man continued with freewill after the events of fall in Gen. 3. “It was the universal faith of the church that man was made in the image of God, pure and holy, and fell by his own guilt. But the extent of sin and the consequences of the fall were not fully discussed before the Pelagius-Augustine controversy in the fifth century. (Schaff, Vol. II, p. 246)"

"Augustine is credited with championing the doctrine that said because every future person on humanity was in Adam’s seed potentially, thus every human was morally corrupted and made guilty of sin by Adam’s sin. This doctrine, known as Adamic sin, or original sin, was accepted into Catholicism at the Council of Trent (1545) at the beginning of the reformation movement. … “Adam’s first sin has been transmitted to all his descendants”."


  • The creeds of the reformation adopted the doctrine, and Calvin devolved his systematic theology with original sin, or inherited depravity, as its foundational doctrine. For example, the Augsburg Confession of Faith (1530), Lutheranism’s creed, asserted: [A]ll men, born according to nature, are born with sin, that is, without the fear of God, without confidence towards God and with concupiscence, and that this original disease or flaw is truly a sin, bringing condemnation and also eternal death to those who are not reborn through baptism and the Holy Spirit (Article II).
  • The Westminster Confession of Faith in the Presbyterian Book of Confessions. “Our first parents … sinned … By this sin they fell from their original righteousness, and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. …the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity…From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions”–(Chap. VI, sec. 1-4.) “Every sin, both original and actual … doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal”–(Chap. VI, sec. 6.)"


OS is a creed of man introduced centuries later, long after Christ and His Apostles. It has no Bible basis whatsoever.
 
Rom 4:14 "For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:"
Rom 4:15 "Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression."

V14 "they which are of the law" - Paul is speaking about those who want to keep the OT law of Moses. That OT law required strict, flawless law keeping to be justified. If being made heirs is dependent upon perfect, flawless law keeping then faith is void/worthless and the promise is no effect for no one could ever keep the law perfectly.

V15 'the law worketh wrath' means all the OT law did was condemn, it showed no mercy. Paul then shows the only way for humans to perfectly sinless is by not having any law at all to transgress.

Therefore Paul is not saying there was never any law but his point is the only way for humans to avoid transgression would be by having no law.

My point in quoting Rom 4:15 and 1 Jn 3:4 is to give a Bible definition of sin. According to the Bible, in order for sin to exist there (1) must be law and (2) an accountable person must transgress that law. Hence sin is NOT a substance or an idea passed from one person to another but sin is a transgression against God's law. No one is born having transgressed God's law (Rom 9:11) therefore no one is born a sinner.




I agree Adam was not created with sin nor with a sin nature nor totally depraved...but yet he was still capable of sinning. All that is needed for a person to sin is a law and a free will to choose and break that law. So again a sin nature or totally depravity is not necessary for one to be a sinner. We today are sinners by following in Adam's step in using our free will to transgress God's NT law/commands. So we do not need to inherit sin or sin nature from Adam to be sinners as some people may think.



There is pleasure, that is a reason why people sin but sin is deceptive. What is pleasurable now will bring trouble later. As I have heard it said about sin being deceptive is that sin will take a person farther than they wanted to go, cost them more that what they can afford to pay and not bring true fulfillment sin lead them to believe it would.




Yep.


Yep.





More or less this is what I have been saying.....we do NOT inherit Adam's sin but we sure do have to deal with the consequence of Adam's sin. We will all physically die as a consequence of Adam sin NOT because we inherit Adam's sin. Those that die as infants dies as a consequence of Adam's sin not because they inherited Adam's sin. Jesus came into this world in all aspects like a human meaning He would also die physically as we all do as a consequence of Adam sinning not because He inherited Adam's sin.

An example I used earlier where a drink driver crashes into another vehicle killing those in that vehicle. They suffered the consequence of the drunk driver's sin but do not inherit the drunk driver's sin.



Yes, as they mature mentally they learn right from wrong THEN sin springs up them (Rom 7:9) when they choose to do wrong.



Free will in choosing to not obey God is why men disobey God. Again, we agreed that Adam had no sin nature, no totally depravity. Yet he was still able to sin because he had free will and chose to sin. And since Adam did not need a sin nature to sin we do not need it either for we like Adam can use our free will to sin.

(I am seeing we will never agree on this)


Adam was not created impure nor was Cain and Able born sinners. They sinned just like Adam in using their free will to sin. DNA is an object like a door knob, neither are sinful. There is no sin DNA, no sin gene. Some falsely claim people are born homosexuals. If that were the case then they cannot be rightly justly condemned by man or God. But the fact is they sin the sin of homosexuality for those CHOOSE to commit that sin therefore are accountable, culpable for their free will choice as we all are. Yet some repent CHOOSING to start doing righteousness.

Again in Rom 7:8-9 Paul shows that he was not with sin but sin was something that sprang up in him later in life when leaned right and wrong, God's commandments.

Again I see we will never agree on this.

Again Adam was not created impure but was still able sin for all it takes to sin is a law and free will to choose and transgress that law. Therefore we do not need to be born with a sin nature for all we need is law and choose to transgress that law.

Nowhere ever does Paul say men are born with a sin nature.

Again Adam did not need a sin nature to sin and neither do we. Nor was Adam born with sin neither are we. The idea of OS did not come from Christ His Apostles nor any Bible writer but was a false idea that came from uninspired men as Augustine Luther and Calvin. OS was never taught the Jews in the OT nor did they believe such an idea. The earlier church did not teach or believe it. OS was a corruption that did not show up till about the 5th century.
[/quote][/QUOTE]

Just a few comments:

1. You may be right....one of the biggest problems in Christianity is how evil is in the world and what made Adam sin if he was made without a sin nature.

It's just that the teaching of Christianity accepts this problem and does not change its teaching, from the beginning, to try to explain it the way you do. I hope you''re aware that your belief system is not within mainline Christianity.

2. I'm happy to note that you know the history of Original Sin. So if you know the history of it...why is it a problem to you or to those that believe as you do? There is NO church (denomination) that I know of that teaches that babies go to hell if they die ---- even if they are NOT baptized --- even the Catholic Church, to which Augustine belonged, does not believe this or teach this.

3. As to THE LAW...you keep repeating that where there is no law there is no transgression.
And yet YOU yourself state that God gave Adam a law: Do Not Eat.
How do you reconcile the two? As I've been stating from the beginning, the law has always existed from the beginning of time. Man has always been either saved or lost. I give you the times of Noah. Were all saved? Was the law in existence? No! Man sinned even before the law.
Adam sinned...lost his purity....and was banished from the Garden.

Paul is not the easiest writer to understand and he complicates many simple teachings.
I'm not willing to debate this.
Although I'd be willing to, if you so wanted.

I refer you to Luke 16 Lazarus and the Rich Man.
Where did the saved go?
Where did the unsaved go?

God's commandments did not begin with Moses,,,they existed even before then as Romans states. Romans 5:13-16......



4. I NEVER speak of total depravity. This is a calvinistic teaching. I fail to understand why you keep bringing this up.

5. It seems to me the only fact we disagree on is whether or not man is born with a sin nature.
I explained to you the reason why understanding this has helped me greatly to know and understand the nature of persons and why they do what they do.

If you cannot accept this, it has no bearing on salvation and for this reason I find it unnecessary to continue this discussion ad infinitum.

6. I NEVER said we inherit Adam's sin. You keep debating something we agree on.

7. Romans 7:8-9
Sin ALWAYS existed.
Perhaps Paul is explaining that WE may not know about it...but God always knew about sin and man also always knew about it. Why did Adam hide? He KNEW he had sinned. He knew he transgressed. There were no 10 commandments yet.
Go on to Romans 7:12-13

I think that's it..unless you care to discuss sin and law and God's commandments and when it all began.
 
(my emp)

"This question (original sin) was not much debated for the first 3 centuries following the revelation of the gospel. It was commonly believed that man continued with freewill after the events of fall in Gen. 3. “It was the universal faith of the church that man was made in the image of God, pure and holy, and fell by his own guilt. But the extent of sin and the consequences of the fall were not fully discussed before the Pelagius-Augustine controversy in the fifth century. (Schaff, Vol. II, p. 246)"

"Augustine is credited with championing the doctrine that said because every future person on humanity was in Adam’s seed potentially, thus every human was morally corrupted and made guilty of sin by Adam’s sin. This doctrine, known as Adamic sin, or original sin, was accepted into Catholicism at the Council of Trent (1545) at the beginning of the reformation movement. … “Adam’s first sin has been transmitted to all his descendants”."


  • The creeds of the reformation adopted the doctrine, and Calvin devolved his systematic theology with original sin, or inherited depravity, as its foundational doctrine. For example, the Augsburg Confession of Faith (1530), Lutheranism’s creed, asserted: [A]ll men, born according to nature, are born with sin, that is, without the fear of God, without confidence towards God and with concupiscence, and that this original disease or flaw is truly a sin, bringing condemnation and also eternal death to those who are not reborn through baptism and the Holy Spirit (Article II).
  • The Westminster Confession of Faith in the Presbyterian Book of Confessions. “Our first parents … sinned … By this sin they fell from their original righteousness, and communion with God, and so became dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. …the guilt of this sin was imputed, and the same death in sin and corrupted nature conveyed to all their posterity…From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions”–(Chap. VI, sec. 1-4.) “Every sin, both original and actual … doth, in its own nature, bring guilt upon the sinner, whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God, and curse of the law, and so made subject to death, with all miseries spiritual, temporal, and eternal”–(Chap. VI, sec. 6.)"


OS is a creed of man introduced centuries later, long after Christ and His Apostles. It has no Bible basis whatsoever.
It HAS a bible basis.
This is what you refuse to accept.

Original Sin is just another name for concupiscence or the flesh or sin nature.
It was given the name original sin because it was the ORIGINAL SIN that Adam committed.

Augustine messed up the whole concept.
He came along 400 years after Jesus died with his strange teaching.
Why are you so obsessed with this?

The CC accepted ORIGINAL SIN when Augustine taught this.
It did NOT wait till the Council of Trent...it was made a doctrine at that time
to combat Protestantism. Why do you think babies began to be baptized before 1500AD??

The Confessions of Faith are of the reformed, or calvinistic, faith.
Can we forget about Calvinism since nothing of what it teaches is biblical?

What you state in your first paragraph is 100% correct and, if I were you, I'd stick to that, except for the fact that you DO have to have a REASON as to why persons sin.

Do 7 year olds lie?
Why?
 
Back
Top