Ps. 51:5 "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me."
These verse will take a lot to explain, but it also has to be consistent with all these verse showing a child is innocent:
Now Ps. 51:5 "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me."
You do realize a careful read of this verse says: “…in sin my
mother conceived me.”, and the iniquity is in the being brought forth”, so the fault is with the mother’s sin and being brought forth conception, so what sin is he talking about?
David talks about how he was treated as an outsider by his brothers: David describes quite literally in the psalm, “I was a stranger to my brothers, a foreigner to my mother’s sons . . . they put gall in my meal, and gave me vinegar to quench my thirst.” So does this have something to do with David’s mother?
This verse is a Hebrew poetic parallelism, with the second line of the verse saying the same thing as the first line in a slightly different way. The first verb, of which David is the subject, is in the Pulal tense (as is "made" in # Job 15:7 ), which is an idiom used to refer to creation or origins, and is the 'passive' form of Polel ("formed": # Ps 90:2 Pro 26:10 ). TWOT, #623, 1:270.
The subject is, as the verse clearly states, the 'circumstances' of his conception- the sexual union which produced him was an act of sin, and addresses the unrighteousness of his mother's act.
Looking at David’s Mother
Exodus 34:7 maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.”
Matthew 1:5 Salmon the father of Boaz, whose mother was Rahab, Boaz the father of Obed, whose mother was Ruth, Obed the father of Jesse
Torah specifically forbids an Israelite to marry a Moabite convert, since this is the nation that cruelly refused the Jewish people passage through their land, or food and drink to purchase, when they wandered in the desert after being freed from Egypt.
But this has to do with Jesse a Moabite descendent marrying a Jewish woman not the opposite, so is she condemned?
There is another twist to the story: 1CHR 2:13-16 13 “And Jesse begat his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimma the third, 14 Nethaneel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, 15 Ozem the sixth, David the seventh: 16 Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three. 17 And Abigail bare Amasa: and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmeelite.”
….and the father of David’s half-sisters was not Jesse, but Nahash: 2Sam 17:25 “And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man’s son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab’s mother.”
So, David’s mother was previously married to Nahash a gentile, so does that make her unclean?
Rom. 5:12 "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned"
Again, it does not say death came to all people because Adam sinned, but because all sin. All mature adults need the reality of death hanging in their future to help them to realize they need forgiveness now and may not have tomorrow. It says nothing about humans inheriting anything, but they will eventually sin.
Rom. 7:13 "Therefore did that which is good become a cause of death for me? May it never be! Rather it was sin, in order that it might be shown to be sin by effecting my death through that which is good, so that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful."
This is saying nothing about inheriting sin? In fact read the whole section Ro. 7: I would not have known what sin was had it not been for the law. For I would not have known what coveting really was if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”
8 But sin, seizing the opportunity afforded by the commandment, produced in me every kind of coveting. For apart from the law, sin was dead. 9 Once I was alive apart from the law; but when the commandment came, sin sprang to life and I died.
Paul says he was alive to begin with but died only after he sinned and not after Adam sinned.
The preponderance of evidence shows that the sinful nature is in us when we are born, and that inclination drives us to commit sinful acts. When John says "if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves..." he is talking about the inclination to commit sinful acts.
No, the preponderance of verse suggests the opposite:
Spiritual consequences of sin cannot be transmitted from father to son but only falls on the one who committed the act: Ezek 18:1-4; 18-20; Jer 32:29-30
Sin is committed by individually breaking God's law: 1 Jn 3:4
The spoken and written gospel message is God's power for salvation: Rom 1:16; 1 Cor. 1:18
God said that the king of Tyrus was "blameless in your ways from the day you were created, until unrighteousness was found in you." Ezek 28:15
"God made men upright but they sought devices" Eccl 7:29 (plural can't refer only to Adam)
Jer 19:2-6 human sacrifices of children to Baal is called the "blood of the innocent"
Jesus teaches us that we must become as little children to enter the kingdom of God (Matt. 18:3- 4; Lk. 18:16-17)
Apostle Paul: Rom 7:9-11 "Once alive" "sin killed me"
It appears to me you are confusing the physical nature with the spiritual. Sin is a systemic problem, having to do with man's autonomy and rebellion against God, which is embedded in his nature. Thus, he naturally loves pleasure more than God.
Our discussion has been on inherited sin not just inevitably sinning sins I agree all mature adults will sin, but that is not because of Adam and Eve doing something they could have kept from doing.
straw man argument, since God is condemning those in rebellion against Him. If Satan was capable of telling the truth, Jesus would not have said "there is no truth in him." And if Satan can't tell the truth, then is God unjust to condemn him? Your argument doesn't hold water.
Satan did say some true statements to Eve and Jesus.
Unless God supernaturally enlivens a person as Eph. 2:5 says, that person will never accept God's charity. This is the plight of man that only Christ can save him from.
Eph. 2: 4 But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, 5 made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved.
Just as the prodigal son in his “dead” state by Christ’s definition of “dead” could come to his senses and for selfish reasons turn to his father, there is nothing in Eph. 2 which states man does not have the ability to reject God’s salvation, just those Paul is addressing accepted God’s salvation.
I don't really want to argue speculation. This is your opinion and speculation based on your agenda to reject the idea of predestination. But scripturally, those who are spiritually dead cannot spiritually resurrect themselves. It takes a person spiritually resurrected in order to obey what God commands according to God's terms, and this idea is inherent to Eph. 2:5.
Again, the person who does not reject God’s invitation will be saved, but they certainly did not “resurrect themselves”?
Ok, if you insist on using the term "free will," I'll go with you here. This freedom to choose to be Satan's children lacked knowledge, wisdom, and any insight into truth. So then, how could it be a "free will" choice? It was made in ignorance and stupidity. In fact, it was made in bondage to sin, since Jesus said "he who sins is a slave to sin." If by sinning, a person chooses to be Satan's child, he is already a slave to sin. This how people start sinning, it's because they are born with it.
Adam and Eve were not “born with sin” and yet they sinned, so if there are a lot more ways to sin every mature adult will sin.
We do have knowledge of good and evil, so there is a choice, but we cannot keep from every sin all the time (our knowledge produces way too many ways to sin). Paul in Ro. 7 was alive and doing great with the first 9 commandments, but coveting was his down fall. So was Paul making free will choices to keep the first 9 commandments?
So then, you are saying that a person must become righteous first, before becoming a child of God?
NO! They just need to be willing to accept pure charity (like a poor true bagger) as pure charity for even selfish reasons (selfish reasons are not righteous since being unselfish is righteous).
I think you are inconsistent in your conversation. You claim that a person by himself can make the worthy choice of accepting Christ (that's doing something, BTW, and according to scripture it is a worthy choice, since righteousness comes by that faith with which we make that choice), and yet you deny that man can do something worthy. I see inconsistency here.
I never said: “a person by himself can make the worthy choice of accepting Christ”, but they just need to be willing to accept pure charity (like a poor true bagger) as pure charity for even selfish reasons (selfish reasons are not righteous, since being unselfish is righteous). What “worthy” thing did the prodigal son do?
Only believers are willing to do what you describe, and that faith is the gift of God. We have to have that gift first, then we can exercise the hope of God's forgiveness in Christ. Therefore, God's grace comes first, then our faith logically follows, then obedience.
God is always gracious with everyone, but some accept His grace and others reject His grace.
Satan's will was wrapped up in his conceit. So, from Satan's POV it was "free will" but from God's POV it was slavery. And it's the same with men. People see their personal autonomy as their most precious possession, yet God calls it bondage because it is contrary to how man was designed. We were created to glorify God in our lives by the faith that God is working His will through us. Lacking that faith is what autonomy is, and is therefore the essence of sin.
TD
I do not think all people see their autonomy as being that “precious”.
So satan was always conceited?
So does the person predestined to go to hell, glorify God?
If “autonomy” is the essence of sin is God autonomous and thus the essence of sin?
Just very limited autonomy allows humans to Love not like a robot, but Love like God Loves us.
