Why Does Man Sin?

[Benoni]

No actually the spirit of truth not your “theological hermeneutics” is suppose to lead and guide you into all truth.

To prove you are right about context; explain why Cain sacrifice was not acceptable to God’s and Abel’s was IN CONTEXT???????

1 Corin 2:9 ​

However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"[2] -- 10 but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. ​

11 The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. ​

12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment: ​

​

 

[dancinggurl54]

Some People assume that Cain's sacrifice of fruit was defiecient because it did not involve the shedding of blood, which God required for forgiveness of sins (Heb.2:22). But nothing in ch. 4 indicates that Cain and Abel came to God forgiveness; their sacrifices were acts of worship. In the later sacrificial system of israel, God Blessed the presentation of grain offerings alongside the sacrfices of animals (see Leve. 6:14-23). A farmer presented a portion of his produce just as a herbsman presented a sample of his flock. Cain's sacrifice was deficient because Cain did not "do well" (V.7), not because the sacrifice was the "fruit of the ground." Abel's sacrifice was the best that he had to offer--the firstborn and their fat. There are no similar descriptive words for Cain's sacrifice. That is, Cain brought a token gift of his produce to the Lord, but Abel brought the very best. God respected or looked with favor first upon the person, the on his sacrifice (see Ps. 40:6-8). Abel's offering was "more excellent" than Cain's because of Abel's faith in the Lord (Heb. 11:4).

 

[Benoni]

Some People assume that Cain's sacrifice of fruit was defiecient because it did not involve the shedding of blood, which God required for forgiveness of sins (Heb.2:22). But nothing in ch. 4 indicates that Cain and Abel came to God forgiveness; their sacrifices were acts of worship. In the later sacrificial system of israel, God Blessed the presentation of grain offerings alongside the sacrfices of animals (see Leve. 6:14-23). A farmer presented a portion of his produce just as a herbsman presented a sample of his flock. Cain's sacrifice was deficient because Cain did not "do well" (V.7), not because the sacrifice was the "fruit of the ground." Abel's sacrifice was the best that he had to offer--the firstborn and their fat. There are no similar descriptive words for Cain's sacrifice. That is, Cain brought a token gift of his produce to the Lord, but Abel brought the very best. God respected or looked with favor first upon the person, the on his sacrifice (see Ps. 40:6-8). Abel's offering was "more excellent" than Cain's because of Abel's faith in the Lord (Heb. 11:4).

Much could be argued and debated on these sacrifices; there are many verses in scripture that paint a much deeper understanding; I noticed like me you’re using all of Bible to prove your point; and that is how it works. Little to do with the context of the verse; not to say there are valid points in Genesis; but for a total picture do not limit truth to some man made law of context. I think Cain did the best he could do with what he had. Cain became wroth unto God only after his sacrifice was not acceptable; that is where the sin was. The Levitical priest could not wear wool; which speaks of sweat

 

[Hentenza]

No actually the spirit of truth not your “theological hermeneutics” is suppose to lead and guide you into all truth.

To prove you are right about context; explain why Cain sacrifice was not acceptable to God’s and Abel’s was IN CONTEXT???????

1 Corin 2:9
However, as it is written: "No eye has seen, no ear has heard, no mind has conceived what God has prepared for those who love him"[2] -- 10 but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.
11 The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God. For who among men knows the thoughts of a man except the man's spirit within him? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.
12 We have not received the spirit of the world but the Spirit who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us. 13 This is what we speak, not in words taught us by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit, expressing spiritual truths in spiritual words. 14 The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15 The spiritual man makes judgments about all things, but he himself is not subject to any man's judgment:
​

Fine. Dancingurl54 nailed it IN context. Cain and Abel, "in the course of time" brought offerings to the Lord (Genesis 4:3). Without doubt, they were doing this because God had revealed it to them. It is clear that the offering was to be a substitutionary atonement, because we read in Hebrews 11:4, "By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did." When Abel came for worship, it was by faith that he brought his offering, "fat portions from some of the first-born of his flock" (Genesis 4:4). The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, and it was accepted.

His brother Cain brought "some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord" (Genesis 4:3). But on Cain and his offering the Lord did not look with favor. We do not know how He expressed His rejection, but it was evident. In Jude 11, we read, "They have taken the way of Cain," referring to lawless men. This may mean that they, like Cain, disobediently devised their own ways of worship, they did not come by faith. Cain’s offering, while acceptable in his own eyes, was not acceptable to the Lord. The result was that Cain became very angry, and later, in the field, he killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:8).

Why did Cain kill Abel? It was premeditated murder, caused by anger, jealousy, and pride. John wrote, "Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother’s were righteous" (1 John 3:12). The evil in his heart was further revealed when the Lord asked Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" "I don’t know," he replied. "Am I my brother’s keeper?" (Genesis 4:9). The Lord brought a curse on Cain, and he went out from His presence.

The use of typology in explaining Cain and Abel sacrifices simplifies the understanding but you still have to take each chapter in context to arrive at a proper answer.

On a different note, your use of 1 Cor 2:9-15 to attempt to prove some kind of point (I am not sure what you are saying) needs some added explanation.

 

[Benoni]

Fine. Dancingurl54 nailed it IN context. Cain and Abel, "in the course of time" brought offerings to the Lord (Genesis 4:3). Without doubt, they were doing this because God had revealed it to them. It is clear that the offering was to be a substitutionary atonement, because we read in Hebrews 11:4, "By faith Abel offered God a better sacrifice than Cain did." When Abel came for worship, it was by faith that he brought his offering, "fat portions from some of the first-born of his flock" (Genesis 4:4). The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering, and it was accepted.

His brother Cain brought "some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord" (Genesis 4:3). But on Cain and his offering the Lord did not look with favor. We do not know how He expressed His rejection, but it was evident. In Jude 11, we read, "They have taken the way of Cain," referring to lawless men. This may mean that they, like Cain, disobediently devised their own ways of worship, they did not come by faith. Cain’s offering, while acceptable in his own eyes, was not acceptable to the Lord. The result was that Cain became very angry, and later, in the field, he killed his brother Abel (Genesis 4:8).

Why did Cain kill Abel? It was premeditated murder, caused by anger, jealousy, and pride. John wrote, "Do not be like Cain, who belonged to the evil one and murdered his brother. And why did he murder him? Because his own actions were evil and his brother’s were righteous" (1 John 3:12). The evil in his heart was further revealed when the Lord asked Cain, "Where is your brother Abel?" "I don’t know," he replied. "Am I my brother’s keeper?" (Genesis 4:9). The Lord brought a curse on Cain, and he went out from His presence.

The use of typology in explaining Cain and Abel sacrifices simplifies the understanding but you still have to take each chapter in context to arrive at a proper answer.

On a different note, your use of 1 Cor 2:9-15 to attempt to prove some kind of point (I am not sure what you are saying) needs some added explanation.

Sorry I disagree; especially when it comes to the NT; so often Paul or John would refer so often to the OT as types and shadows. Take the simple word signified in Revelation one. The whole Bible is divine; instead of pulling these answer from some long dead church leader; what is so bad about looking in God’s Word to answer the deep questions of God’s Word.

Revelations 1:1 ​

The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:​

This one little word is so reverent to the whole book Revelations; ‘signified” or signs and symbols. The Book Revelations can only be understood not as a book of prophecy, or literally; but as a very deep and awesome spiritual book by using signs and symbols that can only be found in the Bible.

Example:

The lamp stand was a piece of furniture that was in the Tabernacle in the wilderness as well as both temples. Like all the furniture in the temple there was always a much deeper and awesome meaning. I am just going to touch on a few thought I thought were interesting. So often God hides his glory from carnal man by types, shadows, parables, mysteries and hidden manna.

Lamp stand was made by beaten gold; that is the craftsman would literally beat the gold to desired shape. It takes heat and fire to purify many different precious metals; gold (Devine life); silver (redemption); brass (judgment); iron (will) and many other precious stones that are found in our earth; One Biblical exception is a pearl; the only jewel that comes from life.

1 Corinthians 3:15 ​

If any man's work shall be burned, he shall ​

suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. ​

The lamp had seven staffs attached to one staff; symbolic of seven spirits of God in Isaiah 11:2; but one God. Isaiah 11:2. Fire comes from the Greek word “pur” which we get our English word pure, purify, purge and purgatory and is symbolic of the purging power of Holy Spirit.

Everyday the priest would have to immerse the lamp in olive oil (symbolic of God’s anointing) and light the lamp with fire.

Then the light was placed in the Holy Place for light. The first court or the outer court had no lamp but was lit by the sun by day; but at night there was no lamp. The Holy of Holies also had no lamp either; for God’s Glory would be all the light it needed on the day of atonement.

1 Corin 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.

 

[holyrokker]

No actually the spirit of truth not your “theological hermeneutics” is suppose to lead and guide you into all truth.

Brother Benini,
Over the past week or so, you've disagreed with me, chilehead, Hentenza and Dancingurl54.

Is the Holy Spirit confused? Or is it that you are the only one of us who listens to the Holy Spirit?

 

[Benoni]

Brother Benini,
Over the past week or so, you've disagreed with me, chilehead, Hentenza and Dancingurl54.

Is the Holy Spirit confused? Or is it that you are the only one of us who listens to the Holy Spirit?

Maybe all your all hearing is your religion

No religion is confused; they have lost their first love; and are following another. ie religion.

Rev. 2: 4Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.

Matthew 7:13
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

 

[holyrokker]

Maybe all your all hearing is your religion

Maybe. Or could it be you?

 

[Hentenza]

Sorry I disagree; especially when it comes to the NT; so often Paul or John would refer so often to the OT as types and shadows. Take the simple word signified in Revelation one. The whole Bible is divine; instead of pulling these answer from some long dead church leader; what is so bad about looking in God’s Word to answer the deep questions of God’s Word.

Revelations 1:1
The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:​

This one little word is so reverent to the whole book Revelations; ‘signified” or signs and symbols. The Book Revelations can only be understood not as a book of prophecy, or literally; but as a very deep and awesome spiritual book by using signs and symbols that can only be found in the Bible.

Example:

The lamp stand was a piece of furniture that was in the Tabernacle in the wilderness as well as both temples. Like all the furniture in the temple there was always a much deeper and awesome meaning. I am just going to touch on a few thought I thought were interesting. So often God hides his glory from carnal man by types, shadows, parables, mysteries and hidden manna.

Lamp stand was made by beaten gold; that is the craftsman would literally beat the gold to desired shape. It takes heat and fire to purify many different precious metals; gold (Devine life); silver (redemption); brass (judgment); iron (will) and many other precious stones that are found in our earth; One Biblical exception is a pearl; the only jewel that comes from life.

1 Corinthians 3:15
If any man's work shall be burned, he shall
suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. ​

The lamp had seven staffs attached to one staff; symbolic of seven spirits of God in Isaiah 11:2; but one God. Isaiah 11:2. Fire comes from the Greek word “pur” which we get our English word pure, purify, purge and purgatory and is symbolic of the purging power of Holy Spirit.

Everyday the priest would have to immerse the lamp in olive oil (symbolic of God’s anointing) and light the lamp with fire.

Then the light was placed in the Holy Place for light. The first court or the outer court had no lamp but was lit by the sun by day; but at night there was no lamp. The Holy of Holies also had no lamp either; for God’s Glory would be all the light it needed on the day of atonement.

1 Corin 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.

Who's pulling answers from some long dead church leader? Have I given you the impression that my answer came from some cookie cutter theology?

Let me give you some flash news. The HS guides me just as much as it guides you. You might want to attempt to explain that little detail that you are overlooking.

You are again going on a tangent with scripture regarding the pur and beaten gold. What does that have to do with the discussion?

 

[Benoni]

Who's pulling answers from some long dead church leader? Have I given you the impression that my answer came from some cookie cutter theology?

Let me give you some flash news. The HS guides me just as much as it guides you. You might want to attempt to explain that little detail that you are overlooking.

You are again going on a tangent with scripture regarding the pur and beaten gold. What does that have to do with the discussion?

I do not know; where do you get your belief; could you be wrong and could you be open enough to admit you are wrong? I have no religion or preconceived bias; I reject all religion. I believe there is a real spiritual Church; I also believe there are also carnal churches, intercultural churches, and intellectual churches and the list goes on. God is a spirit not a brain. BUT what does the Bible say how God choices his anointed?

David was king; He was God’s anointed King; not like Saul who was also anointed by God; but chosen by the people; like many ministries in the church (little c) realm today. David was one of those special people God called, anointed and was anointed as child. Today’s ministry is chosen by men. I have found men of God that I know anointed by the deepness of their understanding not because they have been voted in or out by some church committee. David walked for many years and knew He had an anointing; but he kept it to himself and understood that Saul was God’s anointed; that is until the appointed time. I think we are better off to wait for God to anoint God’s chosen vessel then to anoint our own. Also let us not forget Solomon who was also anointed of God; but because of his marring and turning his heart to false idols he became corrupt. Reminds me of all the different religions out there that man has married into; there is only one way; Christ with in.

The debate here is about did God cause the sin or little innocent Adam. There is no way Adam could do something as big as the sin of man which caused billions to fall into sin and death with out God’s total sovereign will. I have Romans 8 on this; explain that God’s Word is not limited by some human concept of context. I have been trying to show you where context has little to do with scripture.

 

[Benoni]

Maybe. Or could it be you?

Religion has lost its first love; and are no longer in the narrow way. They say they are following Christ; but all they really are following is their religion. (the broad way)

Rev.2: 4 Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.

6But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate.

Do you know who the Nichlaitanes represent?

That is why you cannot hear anything new; you are like the Jews in Jesus day

Mark 7:13
Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

 

[Benoni]

I found fifty verses in the New Testament speaking of the new; not the old not the worn out wine skins; but new; here are thirty of those 50 that speak of the new. Is God Old; or is He New; no He is eternal; that is why God desires us to seek the new wine or revelation and not place them in the old wine skins of religion and tradition. I understand that many of you love the old traditions and you limit God to those traditions; but God is speaking by revelation not tradition.


Matthew 9:16-17

No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent is made worse. Neither do men put new wine into old bottles: else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out, and the bottles perish: but they put new wine into new bottles, and both are preserved.

Mark 2:21
No man also seweth a piece of new cloth on an old garment: else the new piece that filled it up taketh away from the old, and the rent is made worse.

Mark 2:22
And no man putteth new wine into old bottles: else the new wine doth burst the bottles, and the wine is spilled, and the bottles will be marred: but new wine must be put into new bottles.

Mark 16:18
And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.


Luke 5:37
And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles,
and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.

Luke 5:37-39
No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.



Luke 22:19
A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.






Acts 17:20
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.


Romans 6:3-5
But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.


Romans 7:5-7
Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:

2 Corinthians 3:6
Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.


2 Corinthians 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.


Galatians 6:15
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.



Ephesians 4:24
And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.


Colossians 2:16
Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:


Colossians 3:10
And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:


Hebrews 8:8
For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:



Hebrews 8:13
In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.



Hebrews 10:20
By a new and living way, which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh;


Hebrews 12:24
And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.



2 Peter 3:13
Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

1 John 2:7
Brethren, I write no new commandment unto you, but an old commandment which ye had from the beginning. The old commandment is the word which ye have heard from the beginning.

2 John 1:5
And now I beseech thee, lady, not as though I wrote a new commandment unto thee, but that which we had from the beginning, that we love one another.


Revelation 2:17
He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it.

Revelation 3:12
Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out: and I will write upon him the name of my God, and the name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: and I will write upon him my new name.


Revelation 5:9
And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;

Revelation 14:3
And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand, which were redeemed from the earth.



Revelation 21:1
And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.


Revelation 21:2
And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

Revelation 21:5
And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful.

 

[Hentenza]

I do not know; where do you get your belief; could you be wrong and could you be open enough to admit you are wrong? I have no religion or preconceived bias; I reject all religion. I believe there is a real spiritual Church; I also believe there are also carnal churches, intercultural churches, and intellectual churches and the list goes on. God is a spirit not a brain. BUT what does the Bible say how God choices his anointed?

Mmmm.... so you have no religion and/or no preconceived bias but you reject ALL religion. How can you reject all religion and at the same time have no preconceived bias? How can you find the real spiritual church if you reject all churches? How do you know that your rejection is not biased? How do you know that rejecting all churches is not simply an act of bias?
The bible is clear that Jesus established a church. Are you willing to ignore that fact by rejecting all churches because they are mainly man made religion?

David was king; He was God’s anointed King; not like Saul who was also anointed by God; but chosen by the people; like many ministries in the church (little c) realm today. David was one of those special people God called, anointed and was anointed as child. Today’s ministry is chosen by men. I have found men of God that I know anointed by the deepness of their understanding not because they have been voted in or out by some church committee. David walked for many years and knew He had an anointing; but he kept it to himself and understood that Saul was God’s anointed; that is until the appointed time. I think we are better off to wait for God to anoint God’s chosen vessel then to anoint our own. Also let us not forget Solomon who was also anointed of God; but because of his marring and turning his heart to false idols he became corrupt. Reminds me of all the different religions out there that man has married into; there is only one way; Christ with in.

No, David was chosen by God. Read 1 Samuel 16.

If you say that today's ministry is chosen by men, aren't you limiting the HS? Are you making the judgment that ALL of today's church leaders are NOT called by God into His service?

The debate here is about did God cause the sin or little innocent Adam. There is no way Adam could do something as big as the sin of man which caused billions to fall into sin and death with out God’s total sovereign will. I have Romans 8 on this; explain that God’s Word is not limited by some human concept of context. I have been trying to show you where context has little to do with scripture.

Context has everything to do with scripture. Heresies are spun from folks that assume incorrect context of scripture. This has been historically proven through out the centuries.
The Word of God has to be read in context. Any other way is twisting His Word into whatever human sinful nature wants it to say and the fastest way to false teachings. Satan is very much alive and well and still is the author of confusion.

 

[Hentenza]

I found fifty verses in the New Testament speaking of the new; not the old not the worn out wine skins; but new; here are thirty of those 50 that speak of the new. Is God Old; or is He New; no He is eternal; that is why God desires us to seek the new wine or revelation and not place them in the old wine skins of religion and tradition. I understand that many of you love the old traditions and you limit God to those traditions; but God is speaking by revelation not tradition.

You merely found 50 verses that contain the word "new". Hardly proof. Again, prooftexting verses out of context is just twisting scripture to fit your beliefs. You should try it the other way around.

As far as traditions, as long as they are scriptural how can you deny them? Are you not in fact then limiting revelation by limiting God itself?

 

[Benoni]

Mmmm.... so you have no religion and/or no preconceived bias but you reject ALL religion. How can you reject all religion and at the same time have no preconceived bias? How can you find the real spiritual church if you reject all churches? How do you know that your rejection is not biased? How do you know that rejecting all churches is not simply an act of bias?
The bible is clear that Jesus established a church. Are you willing to ignore that fact by rejecting all churches because they are mainly man made religion?


No, David was chosen by God. Read 1 Samuel 16.

If you say that today's ministry is chosen by men, aren't you limiting the HS? Are you making the judgment that ALL of today's church leaders are NOT called by God into His service?



Context has everything to do with scripture. Heresies are spun from folks that assume incorrect context of scripture. This has been historically proven through out the centuries.
The Word of God has to be read in context. Any other way is twisting His Word into whatever human sinful nature wants it to say and the fastest way to false teachings. Satan is very much alive and well and still is the author of confusion.

Of course David was chosen by God that was my point; Saul was chosen by the people. Why am I limiting the Holy Spirit, I just showed you a spiritual pattern in the OT that just shows you how God has even ordained Baby-lon; which had nothing to do with context. I mean God anointed both David and Saul; BUT because of the peoples spiritual immaturity God let the people choose Saul; and God blessed there choice; just like Baby-lon (God uses Baby-lon)

You see the ideal way was let the Holy Spirit choose His anointed; big difference between Saul’s kingship and David’s.

I reject religion; I never said I reject the Church. Which one of the thousand of religion do you call the true church? I have had nothing to do with any religion in over thirty years, and never will have ever again. God is calling thousands of us out of baby-lon.

Isaiah 4​

1And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man,
saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let
us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.​

Now that is what religion is all about.​

What does the word Church mean? It is a Greek Word “ecclesia” which simply means the called out. There is a true Church and a false Church; Baby lon is the false church; while the true Church is not a building, a system, denomination but Christ with in us, the hope of Glory.


Jeremiah 51:7 Babylon hath been a golden cup in the LORD's hand, that made all the earth drunken: the nations have drunken of her wine; therefore the nations are mad.

God uses Baby lon as shown by the verse above; but there is so much more.


Rev 18:4 And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. (KJV)


Actually what I believe in has nothing to do with preconceived bias; it has to do with progressive truth; or present truth.

2 Peter 1:12​

Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.​

Present truth; in other words as the truth is revealed you move with it.


The reason there are many denominations are for two main reasons; spiritual growth and being opened for truth; as well as spiritual immaturity and closing your spiritual understanding. A choice between hearing God; or hearing man and his tradition; men of God like Luther had a revelation and walked in it; but instead of being opened for more they built their denominational walls made of the hardest material on this earth carnal reasoning, religious dogma, etc.

 

[Benoni]

You merely found 50 verses that contain the word "new". Hardly proof. Again, prooftexting verses out of context is just twisting scripture to fit your beliefs. You should try it the other way around.

As far as traditions, as long as they are scriptural how can you deny them? Are you not in fact then limiting revelation by limiting God itself?

I show you fifty verses and you call it twisting scripture; attually what I showed you was a scriptural pattern or example.

1 Corin 10:11 Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world (age) are come.

 

[Benoni]

If you want to limit God's Word to context you will miss the best part of the message. So many awesome patterns, symbols and hidden nuggets all thought out the Bible. All you are doing by putting God's Word in context it can be controlling it; to fit your limited understanding; instead of reaching out to what God's Word truly is saying. You can never control God’s Word to some religious preconceived box.

Jeremiah 2:13 For my people have committed two evils; they have forsaken me the fountain of living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns, that can hold no water. What is a cistern but four hard (religious) walls.

 

[Hagnismos]

Because Adam broke covenant with God by following the devil he basically ended up signing all of his children away as slaves to sin. Paul talks about this in Romans 4-6. So now sin is the state of being not in fellowship with God, and everyone is born into sin. When we talk about children going to heaven before the age at which they know the differnce between sin and righteousness that is due to God's just character that He would not condemn the innocent. But those children definitely have a sin nature and anyone who has a child knows this. Most of their sin they learn from us as habits against God, but they can come up with stuff all on their own too. Lying is something that neither my wife nor I taught our daughter but she has that natural fear of being scolded and apparently figured out with her little mind that simply not admitting wrong will spare her the trouble. I recall having the same notion when I was a child and I do not think anyone told me to do it, I just sort of worked it out in my own thoughts.

Now when someone grows up and either comes from a home where sin is nurtured or just gets out there and gives the big world a try they can develop really complicated scenarios for their sin, things that produce deep wounds in their hearts and minds, and deeply hurt those around them. It is true that everyone's sin has it's own unique flavor if you will. In Christ we are translated from the kingdom of darkness and into the kingdom of light. That is in sin darkness ruled our lives, but in Christ light. So that we are restored in Jesus to fellowship with God. Can christians sin? Yes James and many others tell us we can and do. John suggests that we canot sin if we are children of God but the passage is usually interpreted to mean that a child of God will not abide in sin or practice it habitually, which makes perfect sense in light of the Scriptures.

Now, if you wanted a more detailed answer to why people sin, you could get into some of the issues related to life history and personality and how sin warps things and... and don't get me wrong in ministry that can be very important. When abuse has caused a young person heart to be bitter because that latent image of God in them says they were treated unjustly, well you need to speak to that issue and God calls us to. Even after salvation there can be grave clothes that need to be removed (ala Lazarus as an analogy.)

 

[holyrokker]

Romans 5:12 tells us that sin came into the world when Adam disobeyed God.

The result of that sin was spiritual death - separation from God.

The verse goes on to tell us that everyone since then has also sinned.

It does not say that we inherited sin from Adam. That's an assumption that is forced into the text.

In John 3:7 Jesus said "Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." In other words - when we are born, we aren't spiritual.

Without a spiritual connection to God, we follow the impulses of our bodies. We do what feels good.
There is nothing inherently sinful about our emotions or bodily pleasures. Sin is a commitment to what pleases us without regard to God's will.

Since we begin at birth to do what comes naturally - fulfilling our physical needs - we learn to commit ourselves to our own pleasure. As we grow and begin to become aware that there is something called "right and wrong", that's when we become aware that we have been seeking self-fulfillment instead of God's honor.

That's when we face temptation.

James 2:14-15 says "each one is tempted when, by his own desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death."

Notice that the temptation comes first. It leads to sin, and sin results in death.

 

[Hagnismos]

So then this being born unspiritual is the consequence of original sin? I think we said the same thing. If the state in which you were born upon facing the law convicts all as sinners then we agree with the Scripture that through one man's sin death came to everyone, because all sinned. Would they all have sinned without being born separated from God? Adam forfeited the right for his children to be born (formed) as he had been, in fellowship with God. I'm sure there is some dispute that could come from how Adam and eve were different in their origin than their children, but we are essentially saying the same thing. No human child will ever be born that does not start it's life under the shrowd of Adam's sin, save Jesus.