Tempation MUST come, no?The point is that where did the thing come from which is lusted after. IT had a beginning and it is in the creation so who is the author of the creation.
"We must let" implies a choice, no?WE must let God be God
It is much better we are conformed to His.and not try to make him conform to our understandings.
Nothing is HERE by chance or happenstance, but again, you are portioning off sin as an entity, rather than a choice.He has purpose in everything which is about in His creation. Nothing is here by chance or happenstance.
hismessenger
What I was pointing out from Scripture is that men have the choice to either submit to God, resisting the devil, or to submit to the devil. And men chose to submit to the devil because it IS pleasurable, as Scripture indicates. Will the pleasure subside and will judgement come? YES! But it's still pleasureable for a season, as Scripture also indicates.Zeena, I know you like to post verses, and obviously you should, but please try to say what you mean by posting them in your own words too.
Peter is speaking of professed Christians, who have turned away from following Christ.Yes, but we must consider who Peter means by "they" and also to whom the letter is addressed.Zeena said:2 Peter 2:15
They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Beor, who loved the wages of wickedness.
Concerning my assertions, to which I think you are replying, I think one must take into account this passage:
Romans 11:32
32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all.
He is speaking of the children of the faith of Abraham.Once again, who is Paul talking about when he mentions "the people of God," and to whom is he writing the letter?Zeena said:Hebrews 11:25
Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;
Roundabout is good for a full picture, is it not?This only seems to apply in a roundabout way. What do you mean with this one?
Then where did the iniquity come from which was found in Him. Did someone else do some creating apart from God. There are a few scripture which point out this truth but the religious have not the mind to receive this truth for it offends, just as Peter with the sheets of unclean animals. The thing is to submit to the will of God. Whether or not you understand it or not. Some things are not for our understandings at this time.
Gen 2:9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Many believe it is about choice but it really is about submission. About being content in whatever state that you find yourself in.
That is where the deception comes in about free will. I don't have to choose anything if I understand my condition as per the word of God.
My life is already ordered according to the Lord of creation and I live it as it is given trusting that he has given me the path to His glory that he would have me to go, both good and bad. In the garden, Satan made them think they needed to make a choice when in fact and truth, they were and had everything they could ever need as God had given. All they needed to do was live.
What I was pointing out from Scripture is that men have the choice to either submit to God, resisting the devil, or to submit to the devil. And men chose to submit to the devil because it IS pleasurable, as Scripture indicates. Will the pleasure subside and will judgement come? YES! But it's still pleasureable for a season, as Scripture also indicates.
Genesis 6:5
5 Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
Genesis 8:21
21 And the LORD smelled a soothing aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, I will never again curse the ground for mans sake, although the imagination of mans heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.
Psalm 51:5
5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.
Proverbs 14:12
12 There is a way that seems right to a man,
But its end is the way of death.
Isaiah 64:4
4 For since the beginning of the world
Men have not heard nor perceived by the ear,
Nor has the eye seen any God besides You,
Who acts for the one who waits for Him.
5 You meet him who rejoices and does righteousness,
Who remembers You in Your ways.
You are indeed angry, for we have sinned
In these ways we continue;
And we need to be saved.
John 8:43-45
43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.
1 John 5:19
19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one.
Zeena said:I just quoted further from Romans 11.
It is clear Paul is speaking of the hardening [in part] of the Jews.
Romans 11:25
For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant of this mystery, lest ye be wise in your own conceits, that a hardening in part hath befallen Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in;
So then, Paul is not speaking of all mankind, but the children of the flesh, rather than the promise, no?
Zeena said:He is speaking of the children of the faith of Abraham.
Zeena said:He is speaking of the children of the faith of Abraham.
Zeena said:I find this verse applicable in that men CHOSE to follow their own devices, for it is not only easier [there is no yoke of bondage to God, but to sin, which is FAR easier and satisfactory [albiet for only a season] than submitting to the Holy One].
Romans 6:15-23
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! 16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that ones slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? 17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. 18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness. 20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. 22 But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. 23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Sin, Gehenna, and death do not exist at all with God, for they are effects
I think that that is too simple a solution.GOD CREATED EVIL, Period!
"Like a just judge, God decrees punishment for sin but he does not decree acts of sin" (Lewis and Demarest 1987, p. 312).
How does this relate to Isa. 45:7? God used people in Jonah's day to perform an evil action. In Isaiah's day, God brought disaster on Babylon through the use of human means."Prosperity … disaster: the older, literal rendering 'peace … evil' caused unnecessary difficulties. Can the Lord 'create evil'? Out of about 640 occurrences of the word ra', which range in meaning from a 'nasty' taste to a full moral evil, there are about 275 cases where it refers to trouble or calamity. Each case must be judged by its context and NIV has done so correctly here. Cyrus was 'bad news' to the kings he conquered and the cities he overthrew. But Isaiah's (and the Bible's) view of divine providence is rigorous – and for that reason full of comfort. Sinful minds want the comfort of a sovereign God but jib at saying with Job (2:10), 'Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble (ra)?' (1999, p. 287).
So how did this creature 'turned against' God? The ONLY logical explanation is that everything was God's plan. God designed both good and evil, he is above all, rules over everything. The devil is not a rival of GOD but a creature working according to how it was designd to work.
Good question. I gotta think that from womans' punishment of painful labour. Pain in general is punishment. Punishment for being born a man out of the Kingdom of Paradise.To eliminate any confusion, I am a Christian. I don't, however, think that the Bible is the infallible word of God, but a wonderful and various record of man's search for God written over several centuries, redacted, supplemented and variously translated. I am not any less a spiritual person because of this, and hope that this doesn't immediately disqualify my participation in this forum.
That said, I don't believe there is any such thing as original sin. I believe we are vastly imperfect, but not condemned to be such. I believe that much of Biblical literature is veiled in mystery and therefore there is more that one interpretation scripture.
I am curious: where did the formulation of original sin come from? I don't find it in the Bible. Was it Augustine?
You say that:To eliminate any confusion, I am a Christian. I don't, however, think that the Bible is the infallible word of God, but a wonderful and various record of man's search for God written over several centuries, redacted, supplemented and variously translated. I am not any less a spiritual person because of this, and hope that this doesn't immediately disqualify my participation in this forum.
That said, I don't believe there is any such thing as original sin. I believe we are vastly imperfect, but not condemned to be such. I believe that much of Biblical literature is veiled in mystery and therefore there is more that one interpretation scripture.
I am curious: where did the formulation of original sin come from? I don't find it in the Bible. Was it Augustine?
Umm, which one of these statements (besides the first) is untrue?
- you are a Christian;
- you don't believe the Bible is the infallible word of God;
- the Bible was written over several centuries,
- the Bible was edited (redacted),
- the Bible was added to (supplemented)
- The Bible was variously translated.
- In spite of the above doctrine, you are still a spiritual person and don't expect this to disqualify you from participating in this Forum.
- you don't believe in original sin.
- we (human beings) are vastly imperfect but not condemned.
- much of biblical literature is veiled in mystery.
- there is more than one interpretation of Scripture.
Isn't it?With your view of the Bible and Christianity, nearly every point of which can be challenged, then you want us to tell you where original sin came from. Augustine?
Many Christians who profess to believe in the doctrine of original sin do not know what it teaches. Even more Christians are ignorant of its history and origin: that it had its roots in a heathen philosophy, that it has evolved, and that it was made a dogma of the Roman Catholic Church in the fifth century A.D., primarily by the influence of Augustine.
1. The Augustinian Theory. This is also called the Theory of Adam's Natural Headship and the Realistic Theory. This theory was formulated by Augustine in the fifth century A.D. The Augustinian Theory affirms that, by virtue of organic unity, the whole human race existed in Adam at the time of his transgression. It says that Adam's will was the will of the species, so that in Adam's free act, the will of the race revolted against God, and the nature of the race corrupted itself. All men existed as one moral person in Adam, so that in Adam's sin we sinned, we corrupted ourselves, and we brought guilt and merited condemnation upon ourselves.
2. The Federal Theory. This theory is also called the Theory of Condemnation by Covenant and the Immediate Imputation Theory. It had its origin with Cocceius in the 17th century A.D. According to this theory, God made a covenant with Adam, agreeing to bestow upon all his descendants eternal life for his obedience, but making the penalty for his disobedience to be the condemnation of all his descendants. Since our legal representative or federal head did sin, God imputes his sin, guilt, and condemnation to all his descendants. It was thought that this theory was necessary because of the problem in the Augustinian Theory of accounting for the non-imputation of the subsequent sins of Adam and less remote ancestors for if real existence in Adam explained our responsibility for his first sin, why should not real existence in Adam and in subsequent ancestors make us guilty for those sins, too?
3. The Theory of Mediate Imputation. This theory is also called the Theory of Condemnation for Depravity. This is the theory formulated by Placeus in the 17th century A.D. Placeus originally denied that Adam's sin was in any way imputed to his posterity. But when his first view was condemned by the Synod of the French Reformed Church in 1644, he published this later view. According to this view, all men are born with a depraved nature and are guilty and condemnable for that nature. They are not viewed as being guilty because of the sin of Adam, as in the Federal Theory. Instead it is the corrupted nature which they inherit from Adam that is sufficient cause and legal ground for God to condemn them.
In fact the doctrine of original sin, inherited sin, imputed sin or sinful nature comes straight from the Scriptures. See, "Is there original sin?"
ibid.admin at Bible.org said:David wrote in Psalm 51:5, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.” (NASB). The NIV’s translation is even clearer. “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”
A.T. Overstreet @ Gospeltruth.net said:What makes this incredible doctrine believable is the fact that there are verses in the Bible which seem to teach it. Psalm 51:5 comes immediately to the mind of the Christian who has been taught to believe in the doctrine of original sin: "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." This settles it for the Christian. If the Bible says we were "shapen in iniquity" and "conceived in sin," then it has to be so.
And the above text would teach that men are born sinners if it were meant to be taken literally. But the language of this text is not literal, it is figurative. Both context and reality demand a figurative interpretation of this text.
For example, let's compare Psalm 51:5 with Job 1:21, which says: "Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither." If Psalm 51:5 can be interpreted literally to teach the doctrine that David and all other men are born sinners, then Job 1:21 can be interpreted literally to teach the doctrine that Job and all other men will some day go back into their mother's womb.
Neither Psalm 51:5 nor Job 1:21 is to be understood literally. They are both figurative expressions. Both context and our knowledge of reality demand a figurative interpretation of these two texts.
David uses figurative language throughout his Psalms. In fact, in the 51st Psalm, verses five, seven, and eight are all figurative expressions. So if verse five can be made to teach that men are born sinners, then verse seven can be made to teach that hyssop cleanses us from sin when it says, "Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean." Also, verse eight can be made to teach the doctrine that God breaks the Christian's bones when he sins, and that his broken bones rejoice when he is forgiven "Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice."
ibid.admin @ Bible.org said:In Psalm 58:3 David wrote, “Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.”A.T. Overstreet @ Gospeltruth.net said:Another of David's Psalms, Psalm 58:3, can be made to teach the astonishing doctrine that babies speak from the very moment they are born: "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies."
But who would seriously teach from this last text that babies actually do speak as soon as they are born? None of these passages is meant to be understood in a literal sense. They are all figurative expressions. If they were understood literally, they would all teach what we know to be contrary to reality; for reality teaches us that bones don't rejoice, hyssop doesn't purge sin, babies don't speak as soon as they leave the womb, and an unborn child is not morally depraved.
The same rules of interpretation that would permit Psalm 51:5 to teach that babies are born sinners, would, if applied to these passages (or if applied to many other passages in the Bible), allow for every kind of perversion and wild interpretation of God's Word.
Look again at the words of Job 1:21: "Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither." Did Job, by these words, mean to teach that he and all other men would some day go back into their mother's womb? We know that such a meaning is absurd. But it is just as reasonable to give to Job 1:21 the nonsensical meaning that Job and all other men will some day go back into their mother's womb, as it is to give to Psalm 51:5 the nonsensical meaning that David and all other men are born sinners. David was not teaching in this passage that he was born a sinner. He instead was confessing to God the awful guilt and sinfulness of his heart, and he cried out to God in strong language the language of figure and symbol to express that awful guilt and sinfulness. But if David intended to affirm that he was literally "shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin," then he affirmed absolute nonsense, and he charged his Creator with making him a sinner; for David knew that God was his Maker:
Thy hands have made me and fashioned me. Psalm 119:73
You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body, and knit them together in my mother's womb. Psalm 139:13 (Living Bible)
Know ye that the Lord he is God: It is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves. Psalm 100:3
Are we to understand from these passages that God fashions men into sinners in their mother's womb? No, we know that God does not create sinners. Yet, upon the supposition that Psalm 51:5 teaches that men are born sinners, these texts could teach nothing else. Who cannot see that the doctrine that men are born sinners charges God with creating sinners? It represents man as being formed a sinner in his mother's womb, when the Bible clearly teaches that God forms man in his mother's womb. It represents man as coming into this world a sinner, when the Bible clearly teaches that God creates all men. It may be objected that God created only Adam and Eve, and that the rest of mankind descended from them by natural generation. But this objection does not relieve the doctrine of an inherited sin nature of its slander and libel of the character of God. For if man has a sinful nature at birth, who is it who established the laws of procreation under which he would be born with that nature? God, of course. There is no escaping the logical inference that is implicit in the doctrine of an inherited sin nature. It is a blasphemous and slanderous libel on the character of God.
One of those translation differences our friend mentionedadmin @ Bible.org said:Then note Paul’s statement in Eph. 2:1-3, “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.” (NIV)King James Version of the Bible said:And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?