A question about babies salvation

A general point when thinking of such things is to remember that God is not an impartial judge with regard to salvation. God is biased toward saving people.

This does not mean God will save people against their own wills, but when the will of the person is not the question, the likelihood is that God will save them.

Elect babies go where ever elect spirits go when they die at any age, they return to GOD.

Non-elect babies who die return to Sheol where they await the judgement day the same as any non-elect person who dies does, Psalm 9:17.

Age makes no difference, only their relationship with our Lord as His sheep, His good seed, ie, His elect legitimate children or not. Not every baby is HIS legitimate child:
Deuteronomy 32:5 “They have corrupted themselves; They are not His children because of their blemish but a perverse and crooked generation.

OR

their blemish is that they are not HIS children.

World English Bible
They have dealt corruptly with him, [they are] not his children, [it is] their blemish. [They are] a perverse and crooked generation.

Blaise N said:

“Where do babies that die in infancy go?,are they immediately taken to heaven,or are some sent to hell?”

Click to expand...

They go to heaven. Why do you think God would send them to hell? Hell is the place where the soul laments over its sins, the infant has done no sins to lament over.
Jesus' blood covers the innocent.
Matthew 19:14

14 Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

When David son was dying he knew he would see him again, why?
2 Samuel 12:23
But now that he is dead, why should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.”
Because David knew he would see his son when he himself reached heaven.

Do not worry over the babies friend, they are looked after by our savior and have their own angels
Matthew 18:10
“See that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven.

I picture all the little ones playing together in heaven. All the miscarried, all the aborted, all the still born, all the small children who died.

d taylor said:

Here is an article that may offer at least one possibility.

The Rapture and the Age of Accountability – Grace Evangelical Society

Click to expand...

Greetings Mr. d taylor,

I know this is not on topic but I noticed at the bottom of your post it says that the earth is stationery. But Isaiah 40:22 in the Septuagint says that the earth is a "gyros." The Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible.

The Greek word "gyros" refers to something that spins or rotates. The gyros sandwich is called a "gyros" because the meat is cooked on a rotating broiler. The gyroscope is a wheel that spins on it axis.

Seeing that the Seventy Jewish scholars who produced the Septuagint translated the Hebrew word "circle" with the Greek word "gyros", and that Jesus and the apostles quoted from the Septuagint and not from the Hebrew, then you are bound to accept the Septuagint as the word of God as Jesus and the apostles did. If the Septuagint says that the earth is a gyros (a spinning object), then you have no choice but to accept it.

The Boxer said:

Greetings Mr. d taylor,

I know this is not on topic but I noticed at the bottom of your post it says that the earth is stationery. But Isaiah 40:22 in the Septuagint says that the earth is a "gyros." The Septuagint is the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible.

The Greek word "gyros" refers to something that spins or rotates. The gyros sandwich is called a "gyros" because the meat is cooked on a rotating broiler. The gyroscope is a wheel that spins on it axis.

Seeing that the Seventy Jewish scholars who produced the Septuagint translated the Hebrew word "circle" with the Greek word "gyros", and that Jesus and the apostles quoted from the Septuagint and not from the Hebrew, then you are bound to accept the Septuagint as the word of God as Jesus and the apostles did. If the Septuagint says that the earth is a gyros (a spinning object), then you have no choice but to accept it.

Click to expand...

johnjanuary1984 said:

No one really knows what happens. But I can't condemn people for believing otherwise. What does the Bible say ?

"Certainly, I was guilty when I was born.
I was sinful when my mother conceived me."
Psalm 51:5

"because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23

"Jesus said to him, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father, except through me.". John 14:6

Click to expand...

Ps 51 was written by an adult, who was conscious of his sin. I think this is a bit of hyperbole, and not doctrine on the state of infants. Even taken literally it says nothing about the salvation of infants, unless we believe that salvation requires moral,perfection. Your quotation from Paul makes it clear that that is not the case.

Rom 3. Paul sees us as simultaneously sinful and beneficiaries of grace. Look at the next verse. All have sinned, but they are justified by his grace. Don’t take 3:23 out of its context.

Lots of people have used Romans 3:23 to prove all are sinners. They are justified through faith.

I don't believe in Universalism.

"without faith it is impossible to please God" Hebrews 11:6

d taylor said:

View attachment 314215

​

Click to expand...

What's your point? Your source doesn't negate anything I said.

Log into Facebook


Isaiah 40:22 -- γῦρον (Gyron), Septuagint (LXX).
Some militant atheists have made themselves irrelevant over the years by entertaining bad arguments that come back to bite them in the ass. The Greek word Gyron used in Isaiah 40:22 is one of those words which militant atheists like Richard Carrier claim mean 2D flat earth. So here we will examine the Septuagint rendering of Isaiah 40:22.
Greek: "ὁ κατέχων τὸν γῦρον τῆς γῆς, καὶ οἱ ἐνοικοῦντες ἐν αὐτῇ ὡς ἀκρίδες, ὁ στήσας ὡς καμάραν τὸν οὐρανὸν καὶ διατείνας ὡς σκηνὴν κατοικεῖν."
Word: γῦρον (gyron)
Christos Terzis, a Greek scholar friend of mine from Greece, was able to break down the meaning of gyron. He said: "Gyron, Gyros, Γύρος, means "round" not circle. And it can well mean the shape of a sphere, not necessarily a circle."
He went further on to say:
"Concerning Gyros...it is actually the same word used to say "circumnavigate the earth". It can mean to go around in circles too. For instance, the Hebrews went GYRO of Jericho 7 times and then it fell.
Ιt's because words in Greek change according to the use they are in. For instance: O gyros Tou gyrou - of the gyros (possessive) Ton Gyron - third person O gyre - calling out to gyros like saying Hey Mark! Come over here. It's the same word. The verse says "the one who possesses the circumference of the earth". I.e. "The whole earth".
The first O in O gyros is O (omicron). The last one in O gyre is Ω omega. The last one shows exclamation. O! gyre!
Gyros is also (and this is useful for our purposes here) rotation. You can find this meaning on this page in Greek, in the first sentence.
https://el.wikipedia.org/.../%CE%93%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%BF%CF...
So when the earth rotates.....it is the same word in a noun γυρίζει/gyrizi
I think the guy on the page shot himself in the leg using gyros to make his case..."
The guy he is referring to is Richard Carrier who shot himself in the leg for using gyros to mean flat earth.
He said gyron and gyros are the same word.
Here are more examples of what the word means and its variants.
γύρου (gyron)
https://www.wordsense.eu/%CE%B3%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%85/...
"1. Form of γύρος (genitive singular)"
γύρος (gyros)
https://www.wordsense.eu/%CE%B3%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%82/
"γύρος (Greek)
Origin & history
From Ancient Greek γῦρος‎.
Noun
γύρος (γύροι) (masc.)
bout, round, perimeter, rim
brim (of a hat)
gyro, doner kebab
lap, round, tour (sport)
tour, turn (work)."
Interestingly the word gyro is applied in Proverbs 8:27 in the Latin Vulgate, while gyrum is applied to Isaiah 40:22. These two Latin words carry the same meaning as the Greek. Lets take a look.
Proverbs 8:27,
Latin Vulgate: "quando praeparabat caelos aderam quando certa lege et gyro vallabat abyssos."
Word: gyro, from H2329 חוּג chûwg
Meaning
https://www.wordsense.eu/gyro/#Latin
"gyro (Latin)
Origin & history
From gȳrus‎ ("circle"), from Ancient Greek γῦρος‎
Pronunciation
(Classical) IPA: /ˈɡʏː.roː/
Verb
1. I turn in a circle, wheel around, rotate.
2. I circle, revolve around."
More Latin Definitions
https://www.wordhippo.com/.../latin-word...
It means "round"
But other definitions are given
"go around verb
campso
circumvehor verb: travel, sail round, ride round, circumnavigate, describe.
circumvenio verb: circumvenid, surround, circumvent, come around, come round.
circumago verb: rotate, wrap, bring round, turn round, revolve.
curvo verb: curve, turn down, bend, crook, arch."
Gyre is also a variant of Latin gyrus and Greek gyros.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gyre#English
Another site for gyre
https://www.etymonline.com/word/gyre
More information on gyre
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/gyre...
"noun
1. a ring or circle.
2. a circular course or motion.
3. Oceanography . a ringlike system of ocean currents rotating clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere and counterclockwise in the Southern Hemisphere."
There are plenty of posts on this page that cover Isaiah 40:22 and the Latin word gyrum (aka, gyrus) used. It verse says "the globe of the earth" in English.
But going back to the Septuagint's Isaiah 40:22. It is best rendered in English as:
"the one who possesses the circumference of the earth". I.e. "The whole earth".
_________________________________________
Now lets compare the Hebrew chuwg
Now keep in mind that none of the Greek and Latin words discussed here change in meaning. Only in application do they differ, as in the difference between the word "move" and "moves." They both mean move. So in this section we will see how well the Greek and Latin harmonize using English words.
Hebrew Lexicons for H2329 חוּג Chuwg,
The New Strong’s Expanded Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible,
H2329. חוּג Chuwg, khoog; from 2328; a circle:--circle [1x], circuit [1x], compass [1x].".
Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon, H2329: "חוּג m. a circle, sphere, used of the arch or vault of the sky, Pro.8:27; Job 22:14; of the world, Isa.40:22."
Now remember that the word used in Hebrew is chuwg and the English words are there to help us understand what a chuwg is.
Chuwg = gyron
1a. Chuwg = circle
1b. Gyron = round, gyro,
2a. Chuwg = compass
2b. Gyron = circumnavigate, circumference
3a. Chuwg = circuit
3b. Gyron = lap, turn, movement on a circle
https://en.wiktionary.org/.../%CE%B3%CF%8D%CF%81%CE%BF%CF...
The earth is round with a 24,901 circumference which people have sailed around (or circumnavigated). The earth turns while it makes its lap around the sun.
Lets look at Proverbs 8:27 this time.
Chuwg = gyro
1a. Chuwg = circle
1b. Gyro = round, circle
2a. Chuwg = compass
2b. Gyro = sail round, surround, circumnavigate, come around, curve, bend, arch
3a. Chuwg = circuit
3b. Gyro = rotate, revolve around, turn in a circle, travel, ride round, bring round, turn round.
Chuwg = gyre
1a. Chuwg = circle
1b. Gyre = circle, round, ring
2a. Chuwg = compass
2b. Gyre = rounded, Oceanography . a ringlike system of ocean currents rotating clockwise in the Northern Hemisphere and counterclockwise in the Southern Hemisphere.
3a. Chuwg = circuit
3b. Gyre = a circular course or motion, go in a circle, turn round.
Chuwg = Sphere
Gyron/Gyros = Sphere
Gyro = Sphere
Gyre = Sphere
Gesenius' Lexicon: Circle = Sphere!
Ironically from the Greek words Gyron/Gyros, Gyro and Gyre, we get the word gyroscope which is an instrument used for proving the earth is round...spherical. Using gyros to prove a case for a flat earth Bible is probably not the best argument to make. What makes this an even harder challenge for atheists is that the Septuagint reflects the Paleo-Hebrew meanings even better than the Masoretic texts (no ill intended towards the Masoretic texts). The Septuagint was translated by 72 Jewish scholars in the 3rd century B.C. And while its not in Hebrew, it reads closer to what the original Hebrew intended. And again, Latin variants don't change Greek meanings. So all the oldest and most reliable manuscripts all say the earth is a moving sphere! I fail to see anything rational coming from these militant atheists and their flat earth side kicks.

coffee4u said:

They go to heaven. Why do you think God would send them to hell? Hell is the place where the soul laments over its sins, the infant has done no sins to lament over.
Jesus' blood covers the innocent.

Click to expand...

Death is the wages for sin, not a natural consequence of life. Death proves sinfulness. The innocent don't suffer and die, except Christ. Ps 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

As well, infants in the womb can and do sin.
Gen 25:21 Later, Isaac prayed to the LORD on behalf of his wife, because she was barren. And the LORD heard his prayer, and his wife Rebekah conceived. 22 But the children inside her STUGGLED with each other, and she said, “Why is this happening to me?” So Rebekah went to inquire of the LORD, 23 and He declared to her:
“Two nations are in your womb,
and two peoples from within you will be separated;
one people will be stronger than the other,
and the older will serve the younger.”
24 When her time came to give birth, there were indeed twins in her womb.

FIRST: the word struggled, S7533. ratsats, sometimes also rendered jostled or wrestled in English, is actually to crush into pieces and the tense of the verb indicates that it was reciprocal, ie they were trying to crush each other to pieces. This implies their sinful, murderous intent was hidden behind the obviously eisegetical rendering designed to lead us away from their murderous intent because they believed in the moral innocence of the foetus.

Now one of them might have been righteously fighting in self defense but not both of them so at least one was attempting murder in the womb.

Secondly, an interesting aside: Why were they being so murderous? GOD told Rebekah that the were fighting over being the first born...

I am very curious why no one asks the question that bugs me: How did the twins in the womb know the Hebrew law of primogeniture and that the first born would (generally) be the ruler so they wanted to kill off their rival??? They obviously did not know that HIS plan for them was that the older would serve the younger. How could the meaning of who was the first born have any impact upon how they behaved in the womb?

And if they were in fact merely jostling for space in a tight womb so strongly Rebekah sought the Lord about what was happening, why did GOD frame HIS answer around their birthrights?

Curiouser and curiouser...

coffee4u said:

Matthew 19:14

14 Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

Click to expand...

So we don't stumble over the doctrine that all are sinful, everyone, and that death proves sinfulness, the words "such as these" cannot refer to their moral innocence so probably refers to their childish innocent credulity, their pure, guileless, or naive acceptance of Christ, not His teaching which they wouldn't have understood although they certainly understood His spirit.

TedT said:

Death is the wages for sin, not a natural consequence of life. Death proves sinfulness. The innocent don't suffer and die, except Christ. Ps 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.

As well, infants in the womb can and do sin.
Gen 25:21 Later, Isaac prayed to the LORD on behalf of his wife, because she was barren. And the LORD heard his prayer, and his wife Rebekah conceived. 22 But the children inside her STUGGLED with each other, and she said, “Why is this happening to me?” So Rebekah went to inquire of the LORD, 23 and He declared to her:
“Two nations are in your womb,
and two peoples from within you will be separated;
one people will be stronger than the other,
and the older will serve the younger.”
24 When her time came to give birth, there were indeed twins in her womb.

FIRST: the word struggled, S7533. ratsats, sometimes also rendered jostled or wrestled in English, is actually to crush into pieces and the tense of the verb indicates that it was reciprocal, ie they were trying to crush each other to pieces. This implies their sinful, murderous intent was hidden behind the obviously eisegetical rendering designed to lead us away from their murderous intent because they believed in the moral innocence of the foetus.

Now one of them might have been righteously fighting in self defense but not both of them so at least one was attempting murder in the womb.

Secondly, an interesting aside: Why were they being so murderous? GOD told Rebekah that the were fighting over being the first born...

I am very curious why no one asks the question that bugs me: How did the twins in the womb know the Hebrew law of primogeniture and that the first born would (generally) be the ruler so they wanted to kill off their rival??? They obviously did not know that HIS plan for them was that the older would serve the younger. How could the meaning of who was the first born have any impact upon how they behaved in the womb?

And if they were in fact merely jostling for space in a tight womb so strongly Rebekah sought the Lord about what was happening, why did GOD frame HIS answer around their birthrights?

Curiouser and curiouser...

So we don't stumble over the doctrine that all are sinful, everyone, and that death proves sinfulness, the words "such as these" cannot refer to their moral innocence so probably refers to their childish innocent credulity, their pure, guileless, or naive acceptance of Christ, not His teaching which they wouldn't have understood although they certainly understood His spirit.

Click to expand...

Proverbs 13:2 A man shall eat good by the fruit of his mouth; But the soul of the treacherous [shall eat] violence.

I don't know who your God is Sir, but my Jesus is loving and just and he does not send innocent babies who have never rejected him to hell for sins they have not committed. My baby is in heaven along with my sister.

"Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein."

coffee4u said:

Proverbs 13:2 A man shall eat good by the fruit of his mouth; But the soul of the treacherous [shall eat] violence.

I don't know who your God is Sir, but my Jesus is loving and just and he does not send innocent babies who have never rejected him to hell for sins they have not committed. My baby is in heaven along with my sister.

"Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein."

Click to expand...

Amen sister!

Anyone who thinks that the God we love would allow a baby to go to hell is not worshipping the same God we are.

johnjanuary1984 said:

No one really knows what happens. But I can't condemn people for believing otherwise. What does the Bible say ?

"Certainly, I was guilty when I was born.
I was sinful when my mother conceived me."
Psalm 51:5

"because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" Romans 3:23

"Jesus said to him, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father, except through me.". John 14:6

Click to expand...

Looking Deeper into Psalms 51:5

This 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.

Read some of the English translation Psalms 51:5

KJV Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

YLT Lo, in iniquity I have been brought forth, And in sin doth my mother conceive me.

WEB Behold, I was born in iniquity. My mother conceived me in sin

RSV Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

KJV Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.

Granted some translators have a problem with the sin being David’s mother’s problem and will point to verses like these:

In PS 116:16, David refers to himself as "the son of thy handmaid", which would seem to testify to his mother's positive relationship with the Lord.

Psalm 86:16 Turn to me and have mercy on me; show your strength in behalf of your servant; save me, because I serve you just as my mother did. She sounds righteous to me.

Thus, they majorly change the translation to be David’s sin, but that is not the original Hebrew. But the result of preconceived ideas.

The wording says the sin is the mothers at conception.

What do we know which could show it to be David’s mother and a problem?

David had two half-sisters (Zeruiah, Abigail)…..:

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.”

Again the translators do not like the idea of these sisters only being David’s so the change the wording and meaning, but the better translations is:

KJV Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three.

Why might these tow only be David’s sisters and not Jesse’s daughters: 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.”

Nahash is king of the Ammonites.

1 Chronicles 19:2 David thought, “I will show kindness to Hanun son of Nahash, because his father showed kindness to me.” So David sent a delegation to express his sympathy to Hanun concerning his father. When David’s envoys came to Hanun in the land of the Ammonites to express sympathy to him,

Why did Nahash show kindness to David?

David’s Jewish mother seems to have been previously married to Nahash the Ammonite and later was the second wife of Jesse, this was not a “sin” most likely but later could have been perceived as a sin, thus Jesse not counting David as one of his sons and all his brothers treating him badly.

A lot more can be said, but it was not David being conceived a sinner, but his mother conceiving him could be perceived as a sin.

bling said:

Looking Deeper into Psalms 51:5

This 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.

Read some of the English translation Psalms 51:5

KJV Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

YLT Lo, in iniquity I have been brought forth, And in sin doth my mother conceive me.

WEB Behold, I was born in iniquity. My mother conceived me in sin

RSV Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

KJV Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.

Granted some translators have a problem with the sin being David’s mother’s problem and will point to verses like these:

In PS 116:16, David refers to himself as "the son of thy handmaid", which would seem to testify to his mother's positive relationship with the Lord.

Psalm 86:16 Turn to me and have mercy on me; show your strength in behalf of your servant; save me, because I serve you just as my mother did. She sounds righteous to me.

Thus, they majorly change the translation to be David’s sin, but that is not the original Hebrew. But the result of preconceived ideas.

The wording says the sin is the mothers at conception.

What do we know which could show it to be David’s mother and a problem?

David had two half-sisters (Zeruiah, Abigail)…..:

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.”

Again the translators do not like the idea of these sisters only being David’s so the change the wording and meaning, but the better translations is:

KJV Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three.

Why might these tow only be David’s sisters and not Jesse’s daughters: 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.”

Nahash is king of the Ammonites.

1 Chronicles 19:2 David thought, “I will show kindness to Hanun son of Nahash, because his father showed kindness to me.” So David sent a delegation to express his sympathy to Hanun concerning his father. When David’s envoys came to Hanun in the land of the Ammonites to express sympathy to him,

Why did Nahash show kindness to David?

David’s Jewish mother seems to have been previously married to Nahash the Ammonite and later was the second wife of Jesse, this was not a “sin” most likely but later could have been perceived as a sin, thus Jesse not counting David as one of his sons and all his brothers treating him badly.

A lot more can be said, but it was not David being conceived a sinner, but his mother conceiving him could be perceived as a sin.

Click to expand...

It is the father who carries the sin which is why in sin my mother conceived me. When the male cell joins the female cell a new person is conceived. It is the male cell that brings with it original sin.

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

It is also why spiritual death did not occur when Eve ate but only after Adam ate.
Genesis 3
6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.
But she did not fall
She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
She ate and was fine which is why she passed the fruit over to him. He then ate and both of them immediately had their eyes opened.

Eve was deceived and sinned, Adam sinned and was not deceived. He sinned with complete understanding.
1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Jesus mother did not convey sin to him because woman themselves don't, it takes the seed of the man to pass on original sin, this is why Jesus had no father, no male cell was used in his bodily creation, it was just Mary and the Holy Spirit. So he was free of original sin. All woman conceive children in sin from the male cell entering the egg not from their own body. Without the male cell there is no new life.

Gyros - "circle" as in a vertical rotissarie for delicious food

coffee4u said:

It is the father who carries the sin which is why in sin my mother conceived me. When the male cell joins the female cell a new person is conceived. It is the male cell that brings with it original sin.

Click to expand...

Neither David nor Jesse are being talked about, but it refers to David’s mother’s sin in having sexual intercourse with Jesse.

coffee4u said:

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned—

It is also why spiritual death did not occur when Eve ate but only after Adam ate.
Genesis 3
6 When the woman saw that the fruit of the tree was good for food and pleasing to the eye, and also desirable for gaining wisdom, she took some and ate it.
But she did not fall
She also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate it.
7 Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.
She ate and was fine which is why she passed the fruit over to him. He then ate and both of them immediately had their eyes opened.

Eve was deceived and sinned, Adam sinned and was not deceived. He sinned with complete understanding.
1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Click to expand...

So do you feel Adam’s sin was much more significant than Eve’s sin and if so than why did God put Adam over Eve?

coffee4u said:

Jesus mother did not convey sin to him because woman themselves don't, it takes the seed of the man to pass on original sin, this is why Jesus had no father, no male cell was used in his bodily creation, it was just Mary and the Holy Spirit. So he was free of original sin. All woman conceive children in sin from the male cell entering the egg not from their own body. Without the male cell there is no new life.

Click to expand...

This idea about humans getting some “seed of sin” from Adam and not Eve goes back before they realized, DNA comes from both parents equally and was added to try and explain why Jesus did not get this “original sin gene”.

People like to have someone to blame for their sins beside themselves and there is Adam & Eve. It is all their fault.

bling said:

Neither David nor Jesse are being talked about, but it refers to David’s mother’s sin in having sexual intercourse with Jesse.

Click to expand...

Exactly, Jesse was a man and as the father of David passed on original sin to him. We all have a father, all except Jesus and only Jesus is sinless. He had a mother because he was to be human, so his humanity came from her, but by not having a human father he did not have original sin.
I am sure others will disagree with me but he is the only human is history to not sin and also the only human in history to not have an earthly father. Coincidence I think not.

So do you feel Adam’s sin was much more significant than Eve’s sin and if so than why did God put Adam over Eve?

Click to expand...

Yes, the New Testament says Eve was deceived but Adam wasn't. She ate the fruit and was fine which is why she passed it over to him, he then ate and both their eyes were open. Again I don't think this was a coincidence but the fact that Adam was in charge and Eve was there as his help mate. They each had their own roles to play and God gave the direction and commands to Adam.

“But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of a wife is her husband, and the head of Christ is God” (1 Corinthians 11:3).
The husband was and still is, in charge. God doesn't change.

This idea about humans getting some “seed of sin” from Adam and not Eve goes back before they realized, DNA comes from both parents equally and was added to try and explain why Jesus did not get this “original sin gene”.

Click to expand...

No one is saying that a person doesn't get DNA from both, but scripture makes it quite obvious that there is a difference between men and women, their roles and responsibilities. That is was Adam's sin that brought in death, that Adam was the head. I believe this is also why God gave the command to circumcise male babies on the eighth day, this signifies a sacrifice, but why only male babies? God never tells woman to do this. There is a difference in what God expects from men and woman if people like it or not.

People like to have someone to blame for their sins beside themselves and there is Adam & Eve. It is all their fault.

Click to expand...

Well it was his fault.
Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned

1 Timothy 2:14
And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.

Again whether we like it or not, Adam did sin knowingly, he did cause the fall and he did bring in death. Eve was under his care and a man is still the head of the wife. It was also part of the curse.
“I will make your pains in childbearing very severe;
with painful labor you will give birth to children.
Your desire will be for your husband,
and he will rule over you.”

None of this means that each person doesn't have responsibility for the sins they commit. Original sin is simply the selfish nature, the propensity for sin, which we must all fight against.
Romans 7
For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. 16 And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17 As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me.
Even Paul had to fight against his sinful nature.

bling said:

Looking Deeper into Psalms 51:5

This 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.

Read some of the English translation Psalms 51:5

KJV Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

YLT Lo, in iniquity I have been brought forth, And in sin doth my mother conceive me.

WEB Behold, I was born in iniquity. My mother conceived me in sin

RSV Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.

KJV Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.

Granted some translators have a problem with the sin being David’s mother’s problem and will point to verses like these:

In PS 116:16, David refers to himself as "the son of thy handmaid", which would seem to testify to his mother's positive relationship with the Lord.

Psalm 86:16 Turn to me and have mercy on me; show your strength in behalf of your servant; save me, because I serve you just as my mother did. She sounds righteous to me.

Thus, they majorly change the translation to be David’s sin, but that is not the original Hebrew. But the result of preconceived ideas.

The wording says the sin is the mothers at conception.

What do we know which could show it to be David’s mother and a problem?

David had two half-sisters (Zeruiah, Abigail)…..:

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.”

Again the translators do not like the idea of these sisters only being David’s so the change the wording and meaning, but the better translations is:

KJV Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three.

Why might these tow only be David’s sisters and not Jesse’s daughters: 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.”

Nahash is king of the Ammonites.

1 Chronicles 19:2 David thought, “I will show kindness to Hanun son of Nahash, because his father showed kindness to me.” So David sent a delegation to express his sympathy to Hanun concerning his father. When David’s envoys came to Hanun in the land of the Ammonites to express sympathy to him,

Why did Nahash show kindness to David?

David’s Jewish mother seems to have been previously married to Nahash the Ammonite and later was the second wife of Jesse, this was not a “sin” most likely but later could have been perceived as a sin, thus Jesse not counting David as one of his sons and all his brothers treating him badly.

A lot more can be said, but it was not David being conceived a sinner, but his mother conceiving him could be perceived as a sin.

Click to expand...

So what your saying is the NIV, and EHV and similar translation's of Psalm 51:5 are fallacies??

All these translations ultimately we're influenced by Satan??

Because ALL these other Greek Scholars couldn't crack the code.... But some how you could ???

Why should we trust your translation ???

johnjanuary1984 said:

So what your saying is the NIV, and EHV and similar translation's of Psalm 51:5 are fallacies??

All these translations ultimately we're influenced by Satan??

Because ALL these other Greek Scholars couldn't crack the code.... But some how you could ???

Why should we trust your translation ???

Click to expand...

What next?? The New World Translation of John 1:1 is thee only accurate translation ???

Sorry, but if you think the makers of the NIV, CSB, or EHV we're stupid fools ,,,. Well then your just being foolish ..

johnjanuary1984 said:

So what your saying is the NIV, and EHV and similar translation's of Psalm 51:5 are fallacies??

All these translations ultimately we're influenced by Satan??

Because ALL these other Greek Scholars couldn't crack the code.... But some how you could ???

Why should we trust your translation ???

Click to expand...

We are looking at a Hebrew verse. Who was the father according to scripture of David's two sisters?