WHY DO WE SIN?

[D-D-W]

True but animals are not the ones that know the difference between evil and good.

Are we ever told one way or the other in scripture what animals do or do not know about good and evil? I have never come across that verse, if it exists; which I highly doubt. And without said verse, we cannot know what they know.

To say either way is nothing but assumption.

 

[GodsGrace]

Except for John the Baptist, no one is born a saint. All newborn babies are sinners waiting to sin. That's just what we are. All of us. Right from the beginning in the womb. We are all created as sinners right from the get-go, destined to do what we by nature are going to do—sin. Only in Christ is that destiny changed. Through faith in Christ we take on the predetermined destiny of the children of God—righteousness.

I agree.
Maybe I used the wrong terminology.
Here goes wording you won't like:

We are all born with a sinful nature...a nature that tends toward sin.
Except John the Baptist and I would argue Mary, the mother of Jesus.

However, a baby is not in any condition to COMMIT a sin.
He just suffers from the effects of this sinful nature, original sin, flesh, call it what you will.

 

[GodsGrace]

As the topic is a strawman, don't you think an appropriate response is necessary?

No.
Please stop before a ban is put in place.

 

[WIP]

Are we ever told one way or the other in scripture what animals do or do not know about good and evil? I have never come across that verse, if it exists; which I highly doubt. And without said verse, we cannot know what they know.

To say either way is nothing but assumption.

 

[GodsGrace]

Animals do not know good from evil. Humankind didn't either until we took from the fruit of the tree.

This is true.
Animals respond by instinct,
not by moral values.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I agree.
Maybe I used the wrong terminology.
Here goes wording you won't like:

We are all born with a sinful nature...a nature that tends toward sin.
Except John the Baptist and I would argue Mary, the mother of Jesus.

However, a baby is not in any condition to COMMIT a sin.
He just suffers from the effects of this sinful nature, original sin, flesh, call it what you will.

I'm good with this. Babies are born sinners, not saints. It just takes time for them to act out the sinner they are from birth. Sinner is a condition. Just as being a saint is a condition. A condition determined by who your daddy is, not by how you act. But surely, how you act will follow with who your daddy is. All humans are born in the image of sinner Adam. All humans born 'again' are born in the image of righteous God. You are what you are born after. Your behavior is just the evidence of who that is.

 

[jasonc]

This is true.
Animals respond by instinct,
not by moral values.

I think we underestimate them.Dogs sense seizures,PTSD events and can be trained to warn us before we know.

They are inclined to do that and often enjoy it .

 

[jasonc]

My idiot dog,willow ,follows me around and will love on me and lighten my moods.

Dad's dog prince sensed depression and wouldn't leave me at all and had to be around until I was ok.



Is it consciencous of evil or good ?
I don't think so but they are aware of compassion and feel love ,pain ,fear and anger .they are more then just instinct .

 

[WIP]

My idiot dog,willow ,follows me around and will love on me and lighten my moods.

Dad's dog prince sensed depression and wouldn't leave me at all and had to be around until I was ok.



Is it consciencous of evil or good ?
I don't think so but they are aware of compassion and feel love ,pain ,fear and anger .they are more then just instinct .

Interesting observation.

 

[jasonc]

Interesting observation.

Dogs we don't deserve their friendship.they will follow us to do good or bad.we can mold them to do alot.

I remember the photo of a hog with the dog stuffed next to him on the wall.the owner said the hog killed his dog on the hunt and he got the hog and had his pup dressed to look like he was attacking the hog .his loyal dog wouldn't be right if he didn't take him out hunting .he was bred for it and loved it.

Willow loves ride and has stuck her nose into it as I work on something or as I open the gun safe.she just has to see .then will wag her tail or lick.

 

[Tenchi]

Why not "call them out", as scripture advises? (1 Tim 5:20)

What makes you think I haven't?

All Christians walk in the Spirit.
It is the posers who still walk after the flesh.

That's not what Paul wrote:

Galatians 5:15-17
15 But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another.
16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.
17 For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please.

Galatians 5:25-26
25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.
26 Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.

Why would Paul warn the Galatians believers that they ran the risk of being consumed by one another by their biting at one another? Only if they were actually doing so would Paul need to offer such a warning. To these "biting believers" Paul does not say, though, that they were "posers" but simply enjoins them to "walk by the Spirit" so that they would not "carry out the desires of the flesh." And then, Paul says something really interesting: He indicates that a born-again believer can "live by the Spirit," but not be "walking by the Spirit." He wrote that if the Galatian Christians were "alive by the Spirit," that is, they were born-again spiritually, given new spiritual life in Christ by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5-8; Romans 8:9-14; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20), they ought also to walk by the power of the Spirit. That is, they ought to live as godly people by the power of God given to them in the Person of the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 3:16; Philippians 2:13; Romans 8:13). In saying this, Paul indicated that being alive spiritually did not automatically mean a person was "walking by the Spirit" - as the Galatian believers were demonstrating.

If there is sin in me, point it out...other wise it is false testimony.

See 1 John 1:8-10, Romans 7:17-20; Galatians 5:17.

Not of the believers, but of the posers who were infiltrating the early church in the service of the devil.

This is clearly not the case - as I've pointed out. Your flat assertion here does not in any way refute or defeat what I've shown from God's word to be the case. Simply saying something is so doesn't make it so.

You underestimate the power of God's Spirit in the new creature.
Temptation to sin is always around, but the faithful know that God always provides an escape from them too. (1 Cor 10:13)

No, I don't underestimate God's power. It works in me mightily every day.

Certainly, God provides a way of escape. But why would He if a truly born-again person is perfectly sinless? They need no such escape, already perfect, as they are, in their sinlessness.

You seem not to be looking for a way to walk in the light.

This has nothing to do with my point; it's just an ad hominem deflection.

It means, commit sin.
Pro 4:19 illustrates it perfectly..."The way of the wicked is as darkness: "
The only way to quit walking in darkness is to quit committing sin.
Otherwise, the walk in darkness is permanent.

I showed from John's own words what he meant. You have yet to do so, but are now resorting to another book of the Bible entirely to make your case about John's meaning. Having to do this should set off alarm bells for any careful student of God's word, warning that eisegesis is going on.

My eyes are open so I know how untrue your POV is.
How many sins did it take for Adam and Eve to be kicked out of Eden?
One.

And on which side of the cross were Adam and Eve? Were either of them "in Christ," standing in his perfect righteousness spiritually and thus accepted by God as every born-again believer is?

You do err, not knowing the Scriptures.

Romans 6:10
10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all...

Hebrews 7:26-27
26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens;
27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.

If your identity is "in Christ", look around for any sin.
I know you will find none, as there is no sin "in Christ".

See above.

The fruit of your POV is the continuation of sin.
It is not of God.
It is written..."Beloved, follow not that which is evil, but that which is good. He that doeth good is of God: but he that doeth evil hath not seen God." (3 John 1:11)

You haven't actually shown this from Scripture but have taken things out of context, enacted eisegesis and ignored the actual words that are used and their plain meaning. Offering this one verse as though it dissolves all the rest of Scripture that defies the meaning you're trying to give it by no means does so. You must synthesize Scripture, not pit it against itself, as you are doing here.

There is no sin in Christ.

Quite right. But there is much sin in you. "Putting on Christ" (Romans 13:14) and his perfect righteousness no more makes you perfectly righteous in practical fact than wearing a bear-skin coat makes you a real-life bear. You are clothed in Christ but you are not Christ. Again, see: 1 John 1:8-10, Romans 7:17-20; Galatians 5:17.

Just as apple seeds can only bring forth apples. God's seed can only bring forth after itself.
No liars, thieves, or murderers, were gendered by God.

Once again, none of this deals directly with my point. It is a mere assertion that quite ignores my point. I'm assuming that this is so because you have no effective answer to it.

You use "them" in an effort to include sin in the body of Christ.

Have you ever wanted to live without sin?

I am careful to understand God's word as it is not as I want it to be.

Of course, I desire to live free of sin. Do you?

 

[Hopeful]

What makes you think I haven't?

If you have, why are there many still around?

That's not what Paul wrote:
Galatians 5:15-17
15 But if you bite and devour one another, take care that you are not consumed by one another.
16 But I say, walk by the Spirit, and you will not carry out the desire of the flesh.
17 For the flesh sets its desire against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; for these are in opposition to one another, so that you may not do the things that you please.
Galatians 5:25-26
25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.
26 Let us not become boastful, challenging one another, envying one another.
Why would Paul warn the Galatians believers that they ran the risk of being consumed by one another by their biting at one another? Only if they were actually doing so would Paul need to offer such a warning. To these "biting believers" Paul does not say, though, that they were "posers" but simply enjoins them to "walk by the Spirit" so that they would not "carry out the desires of the flesh." And then, Paul says something really interesting: He indicates that a born-again believer can "live by the Spirit," but not be "walking by the Spirit." He wrote that if the Galatian Christians were "alive by the Spirit," that is, they were born-again spiritually, given new spiritual life in Christ by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5-8; Romans 8:9-14; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20), they ought also to walk by the power of the Spirit. That is, they ought to live as godly people by the power of God given to them in the Person of the Holy Spirit (Ephesians 3:16; Philippians 2:13; Romans 8:13). In saying this, Paul indicated that being alive spiritually did not automatically mean a person was "walking by the Spirit" - as the Galatian believers were demonstrating.

Could it be, that infiltrators were amongst the brethren?
Or perhaps he was just warning them about what could occur...("But if...").

See 1 John 1:8-10, Romans 7:17-20; Galatians 5:17.

So you have nothing to accuse me of.

This is clearly not the case - as I've pointed out. Your flat assertion here does not in any way refute or defeat what I've shown from God's word to be the case. Simply saying something is so doesn't make it so.
No, I don't underestimate God's power. It works in me mightily every day.
Certainly, God provides a way of escape. But why would He if a truly born-again person is perfectly sinless? They need no such escape, already perfect, as they are, in their sinlessness
This has nothing to do with my point; it's just an ad hominem deflectio
I showed from John's own words what he meant. You have yet to do so, but are now resorting to another book of the Bible entirely to make your case about John's meaning. Having to do this should set off alarm bells for any careful student of God's word, warning that eisegesis is going on.
And on which side of the cross were Adam and Eve? Were either of them "in Christ," standing in his perfect righteousness spiritually and thus accepted by God as every born-again believer is?
You do err, not knowing the Scriptures.
Romans 6:10
10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all...
Hebrews 7:26-27
26 For it was fitting for us to have such a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens;
27 who does not need daily, like those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the sins of the people, because this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.
See above.
You haven't actually shown this from Scripture but have taken things out of context, enacted eisegesis and ignored the actual words that are used and their plain meaning. Offering this one verse as though it dissolves all the rest of Scripture that defies the meaning you're trying to give it by no means does so. You must synthesize Scripture, not pit it against itself, as you are doing here.
Quite right. But there is much sin in you. "Putting on Christ" (Romans 13:14) and his perfect righteousness no more makes you perfectly righteous in practical fact than wearing a bear-skin coat makes you a real-life bear. You are clothed in Christ but you are not Christ. Again, see: 1 John 1:8-10, Romans 7:17-20; Galatians 5:17.
Once again, none of this deals directly with my point. It is a mere assertion that quite ignores my point. I'm assuming that this is so because you have no effective answer to it.
I am careful to understand God's word as it is not as I want it to be.

I was warned not to discuss sinless perfection by the "brass" here, so if it is of interest to you, just private message me.

Of course, I desire to live free of sin. Do you?

I do.

 

[Tenchi]

I was warned not to discuss sinless perfection by the "brass" here, so if it is of interest to you, just private message me.

I have spoken often over the years to others who've held to this erroneous notion. Like them, you are as superficial and mistaken in your handling of God's word as they were. So, no, I am not interested in this false doctrine. Thanks, anyway.

 

[Hopeful]

I have spoken often over the years to others who've held to this erroneous notion. Like them, you are as superficial and mistaken in your handling of God's word as they were. So, no, I am not interested in this false doctrine. Thanks, anyway.

"Often"?
Well that sure gives me comfort that I have brethren out there who also speak of unfettered obedience to the Lord.

 

[Tenchi]

"Often"?
Well that sure gives me comfort that I have brethren out there who also speak of unfettered obedience to the Lord.

Yup. Often. There has never been a lack of wolves among the sheep.

 

[Hopeful]

Yup. Often. There has never been a lack of wolves among the sheep.

Do you really think the wolves are the ones who profess, command, obedience to God?

 

[GodsGrace]

I think we underestimate them.Dogs sense seizures,PTSD events and can be trained to warn us before we know.

They are inclined to do that and often enjoy it .

Yes, but it's not done our of moral values.

 

[jasonc]

Yes, but it's not done our of moral values.

They don't understand fully but I think we undersestimate dogs,cats ,cows etc and dolphins .these are more intelligent then we think .

A culture no,but it seems by design that they are able to relate to us and it's more then just instinct

 

[GodsGrace]

They don't understand fully but I think we undersestimate dogs,cats ,cows etc and dolphins .these are more intelligent then we think .

A culture no,but it seems by design that they are able to relate to us and it's more then just instinct

We know that animals have intelligence.
It's different from morals.

 

[jasonc]

We know that animals have intelligence.
It's different from morals.

They have personalities and likes and dislikes .