• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Are infants guilty because of Adam's sin?

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,822
7,667
North Carolina
✟361,189.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Again, my previous response completely refutes your idea here, but you continue to assert the same idea. I think I'm done with this conversation.
Your previous response, post #36, presents no Biblical demonstration of my error in post #35.
 
Upvote 0

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,812
1,132
Houston, TX
✟215,045.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Your previous response, post #36, presents no Biblical demonstration of my error in post #35.
You're completely missing my point! I never said the doctrine of imputation of sin was in error. I'm merely asking questions that require an exegesis in explaining, because I'm skeptical. What I object to is that your reasoning is circular. You keep asserting that Rom. 5 is talking about imputation of sin, and then cite it with the same assertion. Your activity is eisegesis, not exegesis. Do you understand the difference?
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,822
7,667
North Carolina
✟361,189.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You seem to contradict yourself here. You say that spiritual life is reality, but then you say "Paul thought he was spiritually alive" - this is how you are interpreting 7:9 - "Paul thought..." is not literally alive. Therefore, your interpretation of the text "I was alive" is not literal.
Both physical death and spiritual death are literal realities.
Pauls' statement regarding his spiritual death was a literal statement, not a metaphorical statement referring to something else..
Again, my previous response completely refutes your idea here, but you continue to assert the same idea. I think I'm done with this conversation.
Your previous response (post #36) does not refute the idea in my post #38, following:

I. Death is the wages of sin (Ro 6:23),
sin is trangression of the law (1 Jn 3:4),
where there is no law, there is no transgresion/sin (Ro 4:15)
and, therefore no death.

There was no law between Adam and Moses and, therefore, no transgression/sin to cause their deaths.
Then what caused the deaths of all those between Adam and Moses, including infants, when they did not sin against the law?
Their deaths, including of infants, were caused by the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 18-19) to all mankind when there was no law to transgress and cause death.

as well as:

II. Ro 5:17
states, ". . .by the trespass of one man, death reigned through that one man,"

Ro 5:18-19 - "the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men. . .through the disobedience of one man, the many were made sinners.

The many were made sinners
by God charging/accounting/imputing Adam's sin to them (Ro 5:17, above).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,812
1,132
Houston, TX
✟215,045.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
Both physical death and spiritual death are literal realities.
Pauls' statement regarding his spiritual death was a literal statement, not a metaphorical statement referring to something else..
Again, you contradict yourself (although avoiding the issue), so I'll ask you again: when Paul said in 7:9 "I was alive once", does he mean he was spiritually alive? If you claim, no, he only thought he was alive, then you are not interpreting it literally.
Your previous response (post #36) does not refute the idea in my post #38, following:

I. Death is the wages of sin (Ro 6:23),
sin is trangression of the law (1 Jn 3:4),
where there is no law, there is no transgresion/sin (Ro 4:15)
and, therefore no death.

There was no law between Adam and Moses and, therefore, no transgression/sin to cause their deaths.
Then what caused the deaths of all those between Adam and Moses, including infants, when they did not sin against the law?
Their deaths, including of infants, were caused by the imputed sin of Adam (Ro 5:17, 18-19) to all mankind when there was no law to transgress and cause death.

as well as:

II. Ro 5:17
states, ". . .by the trespass of one man, death reigned through that one man,"

Ro 5:18-19 - "the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men. . .through the disobedience of one man, the many were made sinners.

The many were made sinners
by God charging/accounting/imputing Adam's sin to them (Ro 5:17, above).
It looks like you didn't even read what I wrote. I completely refuted your idea that there was no law, no transgression and therefore no cause for their death before Moses. I think you should go back and read what I wrote. I'm saying that Paul had to mean something different than what you claim, because there was clearly law and transgression before Moses.
 
Upvote 0

johansen

Well-Known Member
Sep 13, 2023
723
173
37
silverdale
✟68,763.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
because there was clearly law and transgression before Moses.
paul in my opinion mixes up "law" and "knowledge of transgression" and "law of moses" with the tree of knowledge of good and evil. and over the last half dozen years in various forums i point this out.. usually no one replies to argue he doesn't mix this up.

I think peter made the same mistake but it is not overt and to my knowledge, no one seems to be interested in arguing about peter and potentially James' positions, they would rather argue paul is correct.

So when Peter stands up at Pentecost and declares to the masses "God in former times over looked such matters but now commands everyone everywhere to repent"

well... God has always been commanding everyone everywhere to repent, and i seem to be the only person on the entire internet who has ever pointed this out (yes seriously, if you can find someone who has written some article to the effect that peter was wrong in declaring this, please link it to me) . its just a matter of.. repent to which law? the gentiles were not under the torah, but the ten commandments has always been.. pretty much self evident.
 
Upvote 0

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2024
3,702
2,036
76
Paignton
✟85,308.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
paul in my opinion mixes up "law" and "knowledge of transgression" and "law of moses" with the tree of knowledge of good and evil. and over the last half dozen years in various forums i point this out.. usually no one replies to argue he doesn't mix this up.

I think peter made the same mistake but it is not overt and to my knowledge, no one seems to be interested in arguing about peter and potentially James' positions, they would rather argue paul is correct.

So when Peter stands up at Pentecost and declares to the masses "God in former times over looked such matters but now commands everyone everywhere to repent"

well... God has always been commanding everyone everywhere to repent, and i seem to be the only person on the entire internet who has ever pointed this out (yes seriously, if you can find someone who has written some article to the effect that peter was wrong in declaring this, please link it to me) . its just a matter of.. repent to which law? the gentiles were not under the torah, but the ten commandments has always been.. pretty much self evident.
Don't you believe that the bible s God's inspired word? That He inspired the human writers (Moses, Jeremiah, Matthew, John, Peter, Paul etc.) to write His truth? If you believe that Peter and Paul (and possibly the other human authors) made mistakes in what they wrote which is in the bible, what is the basis of your faith? How can you be sure, for example, that John wasn't mistaken when he recorded Jesus saying, "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me." John 14:6?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clare73
Upvote 0

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,812
1,132
Houston, TX
✟215,045.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
paul in my opinion mixes up "law" and "knowledge of transgression" and "law of moses" with the tree of knowledge of good and evil. and over the last half dozen years in various forums i point this out.. usually no one replies to argue he doesn't mix this up.
Can you give examples of what you are talking about, with your explanation?
I think peter made the same mistake but it is not overt and to my knowledge, no one seems to be interested in arguing about peter and potentially James' positions, they would rather argue paul is correct.
What positions are you referring to?
So when Peter stands up at Pentecost and declares to the masses "God in former times over looked such matters but now commands everyone everywhere to repent"
Actually, this statement is in Acts 17 by Paul in Athens (17:30). "All men everywhere" is referring to Gentiles, since only the Jews in OT times were called to repentance. So by this statement, Paul is including everyone in this general call to faith in Christ and a holy life.
well... God has always been commanding everyone everywhere to repent, and i seem to be the only person on the entire internet who has ever pointed this out (yes seriously, if you can find someone who has written some article to the effect that peter was wrong in declaring this, please link it to me) . its just a matter of.. repent to which law? the gentiles were not under the torah, but the ten commandments has always been.. pretty much self evident.
"on the entire internet"? Are you talking about 2 different issues here? The term "repent" in the OT is Heb "naham" and is mostly translated "comfort." The first one in the OT asked to repent is God Himself. There is no specific command from God for man to repent; however, the first man written about to specifically repent is Job (42:6). Yet, the idea of repentance does permeate the OT from Cain on, and is a definite flavor of the 10 Commandments. Repentance has to do with moral behavior. Paul explains this in Rom. 2.

I'm not sure what your point is in reference to the OP.
 
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,822
7,667
North Carolina
✟361,189.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You seem to contradict yourself here. You say that spiritual life is reality, but then you say "Paul thought he was spiritually alive" - this is how you are interpreting 7:9 - "Paul thought..." is not literally alive. Therefore, your interpretation of the text "I was alive" is not literal.
"Literally" refers to the concepts: "spritually alive," "physically alive"--both of which are realities (literal) and not metaphors.
Whether or not Paul was actually "spiritually alive" does not alter the literal reality of the concept itself.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Clare73

Blood-bought
Jun 12, 2012
29,822
7,667
North Carolina
✟361,189.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
You seem to contradict yourself here. You say that spiritual life is reality, but then you say "Paul thought he was spiritually alive" - this is how you are interpreting 7:9 - "Paul thought..." is not literally alive. Therefore, your interpretation of the text "I was alive" is not literal.

Again, my previous response completely refutes your idea here, but you continue to assert the same idea. I think I'm done with this conversation.
You'll have to demonstrate, rather than just assert, how your post #38 or #39 refutes my idea in my post (#37) #40, following:

That is precisely what Ro 5:17 states, ". . .by the trespass of one man, death reigned through that one man,"

as does Ro 5:18-19 - "the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men. . .through the disobedience of one man, the many were made sinners."

That is precisely what Ro 5:12-14 demonstrates. . .in
that they all died between Adam and Moses when there was no law to transgress/sin against to cause their death (Ro 5:14),
therefore, their death was caused by the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17), and
which was the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness (Ro 5:18-19).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,812
1,132
Houston, TX
✟215,045.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
"Literally" refers to the concepts: "spritually alive," "physically alive"--both of which are realities (literal) and not metaphors.
Whether or not Paul was actually "spiritually alive" does not alter the literal reality of the concept itself.
It looks to me like you're arguing semantics here, so I think this part is done.
 
Upvote 0

tdidymas

Newbie
Aug 28, 2014
2,812
1,132
Houston, TX
✟215,045.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Republican
You'll have to demonstrate, rather than just assert, how your post #38 or #39 refutes my idea in my post (#37) #40, following:

That is precisely what Ro 5:17 states, ". . .by the trespass of one man, death reigned through that one man,"
Physical death reigned in mankind through the one, because he was cast out of Eden, being denied access to the Tree of Life. Spiritual death reigned in mankind through the one, because we inherited the sin nature. There is nothing in here but presumption to say that Adam's sin was imputed.
as does Ro 5:18-19 - "the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men. . .through the disobedience of one man, the many were made sinners."
Condemnation came to all men because the sin nature was transmitted to Adam's progeny. The context of this has to do with people who have sinned, not infants who haven't sinned. Again, there is nothing in here but presumption to say that Adam's sin was imputed.
That is precisely what Ro 5:12-14 demonstrates. . .in
that they all died between Adam and Moses when there was no law to transgress/sin against to cause their death (Ro 5:14),
therefore, their death was caused by the imputation of Adam's sin (Ro 5:17), and
which was the pattern (Ro 5:14) for the imputation of Christ's righteousness (Ro 5:18-19).
In regard to Rom. 5:12-14, here was my response that refutes your idea:
You are interpreting Paul's statement as "there was no law between Adam and Moses, therefore no transgression." But Paul has to mean something different than that, because there was certainly law, albeit not the law of Moses. Examples: Cain most certainly knew he had violated an unwritten (or unspoken) law "you shall not commit murder." If he thought he was innocent, he would not have lied to God saying he didn't know where Abel was. But he did lie, because he wanted to escape the impending judgment in violation of that moral principle. This is how we know there was law prior to Moses. Another example is when God said to Noah if a man sheds another man's blood (murder), his blood shall be shed (capital punishment). This is most certainly law before Moses. A 3rd example is God rained fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah because their sins stunk to high heaven. In this we can see there was most certainly law and transgression prior to Moses. Therefore Paul had to mean something different than what you claim.
 
Upvote 0