Children are innocent, not guilty of any sin

[GodsGrace]

Then how did the newly conceived become sinners so they are liable to death, the suffering of death, when death is the wages for sin, and created by sin??

How do you avoid believing that death doesn't prove sinfulness?

Ted,,,I also read your post no. 125 and excuse me if I say that you really don't understand Paul well when he explains about sin causing death.
(unless I'm misunderstanding you, of course).

Could we go over it please?
To me this is a very important topic to understanding our faith, our nature, why we sin, etc.

So here is what you said:

Then how did the newly conceived become sinners so they are liable to death, the suffering of death, when death is the wages for sin, and created by sin??

How do you avoid believing that death doesn't prove sinfulness?

The verses your pointing to regarding sin and death are probably:
Will go over it line by line....see what you don't agree with----


Romans 5:12-14
12 Therefore *, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin,
One man sinned - Adam. After he sinned both spiritual and physical death entered into the world.

and so death spread to all men, because * all sinned -
Both spiritual and physical death now afflicts all men.
No one can run away from either sin or death.
All men sin and all men die.
13 for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
This is important and relates to this thread:
Sin always existed from the time that Adam sinned.
Man always sinned...but man did not understand how deep was the extent of sinning until Moses
when God spelled it out to Moses with the 10 Commandments.
So even those that did not sin by disobeying God still had to die because of this sin nature that had entered into man.
So men die because Adam sinned....not necessarily because they committed the same sin as Adam...disobedience.
Because how could they disobey a commandment they did not know existed? Until that commandment was given to man.
Now skip to verse 19:
19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
Many were made SINNERS.
It doesn't state that man was born already with sin.
but that he was born a sinner.


So, as in verse 13....in order for something to be a sin...we must KNOW that it is a sin.
A child does not know what sin is....
They don't know that the10 commandments is disobedience against God the Creator.

Again...in order to sin we have to know what sin is.
Verse 13....sin is not imputed when there is no law...

 

[Cosmo]

Psalm 51:5 is the parents being the sinners not the child in the womb.

Ps 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in [a state of] iniquity; my mother was sinful who conceived me [and I too am sinful].

David was not saying that his birth was illegitimate, or that his parents sinned when they performed the sexual act at his conception. He was acknowledging that there never was a time when he was without sin. He was born in the state of sin, or rebellion against God, which is common to all humanity until reconciliation with God occurs. David’s statement is a poetic expression of the biblical teaching about this pervasive, inborn or “original” sin..

But Children are not held accountable.
If they die they get reborn of the Spirit in heaven into everlasting life.

John 3:6
What is born of [from] the flesh is flesh [of the physical is physical]; and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Children have no concept of law.

Therefore, as sin came into the world through one man, and death as the result of sin, so death spread to all men, [no one being able to stop it or to escape its power] because all men sinned.
13 [To be sure] sin was in the world before ever the Law was given, but sin is not charged to men’s account where there is no law [to transgress].
Romans 5:12–13.

 

[GodsGrace]

Then how did the newly conceived become sinners so they are liable to death, the suffering of death, when death is the wages for sin, and created by sin??

How do you avoid believing that death doesn't prove sinfulness?

Sinning does prove death.

And WHY would a person have to have lived BEFORE being born in order to be a sinner?
And why are you going beyond what scripture states?
Isn't scripture supposed to be our authority? Or do we just make up our own doctrine?

The newly created----babies-----are born WITHOUT SIN on their soul.
But they ARE born with the sin nature.

As soon as they can understand what sin is...
they WILL BE committing sin.

You never replied to my post no. 123
Question: WHAT MAKES AN ACTION TURN INTO A SIN?

I had asked this of @Dizerner too.
Please reply.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, I first saw this in the late 60s I believe but I do not accept it now as I tend to think of our spirits as who we were when we were created in the image of
GOD (not our bodies) and soul is the word used to describe our spirits when bound by / in a body.

Do you have your own denomination?
When were we created in the image of Gop?

 

[GodsGrace]

Ps 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in [a state of] iniquity; my mother was sinful who conceived me [and I too am sinful].

David was not saying that his birth was illegitimate, or that his parents sinned when they performed the sexual act at his conception. He was acknowledging that there never was a time when he was without sin. He was born in the state of sin, or rebellion against God, which is common to all humanity until reconciliation with God occurs. David’s statement is a poetic expression of the biblical teaching about this pervasive, inborn or “original” sin..

But Children are not held accountable.
If they die they get reborn of the Spirit in heaven into everlasting life.

John 3:6
What is born of [from] the flesh is flesh [of the physical is physical]; and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Children have no concept of law.

Therefore, as sin came into the world through one man, and death as the result of sin, so death spread to all men, [no one being able to stop it or to escape its power] because all men sinned.
13 [To be sure] sin was in the world before ever the Law was given, but sin is not charged to men’s account where there is no law [to transgress].
Romans 5:12–13.

The first half of your post sounds like children ARE responsible.
The second half sound like they're not.

Could you clarify?

 

[GodsGrace]

Never having heard it before is NOT proof it is not biblical.

No Ted.
Usually if a person that has been studying the bible for 40 years has never heard of a concept before...
it usually means it's not biblical...IOW,,,it's not taught in the bible.

New revelations are indeed ahead of us which just might contradict the teaching of years by the church elite:

No Ted.
No new revelation.
These "church elite" as you call them are the theologians that existed for 2 thousand years.
No new revelation.

Want to know the names of some that got new revelation:

MUHAMMAD
JOHN SMITH
CHARLES RUSSELL
ELLEN WHITE

and others. They got new revelation too.
Do you agree with theirs??

Perhaps they will fulfill
Daniel 12: 9 And he said, Go thy way Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand.
and in
Revelations 10:8 Then the voice that I had heard from heaven spoke to me again, saying, “Go, take the small scroll that lies open in the hand of the angel standing on the sea and on the land.” 9 And I went to the angel and said, “Give me the small scroll.”

“Take it and eat it,” he said. “It will make your stomach bitter, but in your mouth it will be as sweet as honey.” 10 So I took the small scroll from the angel’s hand and ate it; and it was as sweet as honey in my mouth, but when I had eaten it, my stomach turned bitter.
by telling us a new interpretation of an old revelation rather than a new revelation which might contradict Deuteronomy 4:2 and Revelation 22:18.

In John 16:12, Jesus said: I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit, when He, the Spirit of truth, is come

I have no comment on Revelation.
Doctrine is not made out of verses in Revelation UNLESS it is also stated elsewhere.
You do understand that most of Revelation is in reference to VISIONS that John had, right?
There are different interpretations for these visions....
So we cannot know FOR SURE what any of them really mean.

As to John 16:12 are you meaning to say that Jesus sent the Holy Spirit 2 thousand years ago but He is just now
letting us know the truth???

What was He waiting for Ted?
Were the theologians of old too dumb to understand scripture?

, He will guide you into all truth. Hence, Jesus knew some truth that He was unable to disclose to us, and He also knew that this truth would someday be disclosed to the Church. In other words, Jesus knew that the Church was going to receive a new revelation in the future.

So now, this being the case, I ask: would not GOD bear witness in Their Word to a revelation that They intended to give in the future? Well, I think They would (because They've done it this way before) and if so, then wouldn't a person like Paul (who had gone to heaven and learned the whole truth) and John who ate the little bible most likely be under some leading from the Holy Spirit to bear witness in his writings to these hidden heavenly truths so that, when it was time for their public disclosure later on, there would be some scriptural attestation to them?

So when did Paul and John come back to reveal to us the truths they could not reveal when they wrote their letters...
for which Paul died and John was exiled to a remote island.

But Paul and John could not put it in their open writings in such a way as would disclose the secret ahead of time, right? No, the testimony would have to be hidden somehow so that it remained a secret until the right time.

Ah. So you're a gnostic!
Only YOU know the truth.
You have the secret knowledge.

Therefore, Paul and John would hide the testimony in their writings, knowing that until the time of the revelation, their readers would not really understand what they had written, and that would they make up interpretations which would not be entirely true.

It also stands to reason that these false interpretations would endure unopposed by the truth until the general disclosure in the end times, at which time the new proper interpretation would be made known...

Are we in the end times now? Are you looking askance at accepted theology yet?

No Ted. I'm looking to the theology that has been taught since Jesus left this earth and which is
PLAINLY WRITTEN for all of His followers to read.

I do believe I'm going to have to stop posting to you.
I'm not a gnostic and I don't really care to speak to gnostics.

 

[GodsGrace]

Amen! GOD did not present us into creation or had us born into the sin of Adam enslaved to sin...but we suffer and die like sinners as infants...there is the conundrum.

No, GOD created us perfect:
Ecclesiastes 7:29 Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.

upright: Strong's 3477, yashar
Definition: Straight, right, upright, righteous
Meaning: straight
ie, GOD did NOT make us sinful NOR liable to death and suffering but we chose inventions by our sinful desires to rebel against our GOD and so become sinful in HIS sight, liable to death and suffering. Infants from the age of day one, die and it is sin which brings death, James 1:15 ... and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to (creates?) death. proving that infants chose sin before day one.

Stop reading Strong's and start reading the bible.

You didn't even understand Romans 6:16 which is VERY EASY to understand.

Join the rest of us Ted.

 

[GodsGrace]

Of course not...I have over 3 dozen verses I use to defend PCE as scriptural!! Have you not been paying attention? I quote as much scripture as anyone and it is they who cannot quote the words I do without distorting them from their face value...

It's kind of odd when NO ONE understands you or accepts your theory.
This would make me be worried.

 

[GodsGrace]

Reallllly?
Neither do I and the verse does not support that they succeeded which is NOT proof they were not trying to kill each other.

OK.
Difficult to argue with those that read odd stuff into scripture.

 

[GodsGrace]

Rather, to stay on topic, WHAT did HE say to her which you are so studiously avoiding talking about...

I told you what the OT states.

I would like to know from YOU instead:

WHERE did Rebekah go to speak to God.
Is there like a special office somewhere that a person can go to?

HOW did God reply to her?
Was it, like, in a phone call?
An email?
HOW??

Maybe you don't understand that the OT was INSPIRED.
God never spoke to anyone.....
He never wrote down anything....

MEN were inspired to write down INSPIRED teachings that God gave to them.

Maybe you shouldn't be reading the OT...it could be dangerous to your spiritual health.

 

[GodsGrace]

James 1:14 But each one is tempted when by his own evil desires he is lured away and enticed. 15 Then after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death. You are guilty of sin in your desires which when acted upon causes, creates, death. NO sin - no death.

Good.
James 1:14 is describing a man that is going to do something that begins with some kind of temptation and he is enticed...
then it gives birth to sin.

OK

So what made this temptation be a sin?

Think this over well....it's important.

He DID the action.
WHY is it a sin?

 

[Dizerner]

Could you and @Dizerner please state what makes an ACTION become a SIN.

Thanks.

An impure motive or desire that does not perfectly glorify God but serves rather to exalt self.

 

[Dizerner]

NOT a sin.

The SIN nature is not a sin. Lol. "Sin" nature.

Give that some thought and prayer for a bit.



Also these full defenses of the sin nature:

Thread 'FOUR reasons I believe in the sinful nature. (original sin/ancestral sin/total depravity)'

Aug 17, 2023

PREFACE.

For those whom I have come across, who deny that humans have a sinful nature, that is a nature that is incapable of performing a righteously meritorious thought or action without supernatural undeserved grace from God, it all seems to stem back to the idea that, if God allows such a thing, it makes people victims instead of criminals, since no one can help sinning. And underneath that is the appeal to the idea that we can improve ourselves and polish up our genuinely good and pure nature underneath, a kind of self-esteem and self-improvement program to discover the...

• Dizerner
• Replies: 60
• Forum: Original Sin

Thread 'My criticism of Dr. Flowers: Inability and the Sin Nature'

Jul 21, 2023

I had previously addressed Dr. Flowers personally with the following:

The major sticking point for me, as a Classical Arminian, is that I strongly think "Provisionism" hides some aspects of self-righteous theology within the "nuances" of the language concerning the need for grace. Any and all denial of a need for internal grace must be met with extreme skepticism, if for no other reason than the only logical reason to deny a need for grace in any capacity, is to posit goodness and righteousness that is inherent in fallen humans. This needs to be brought out, because it is all that...

• Dizerner
• Replies: 24
• Forum: Soteriology- The Doctrine of Salvation

 

[Cosmo]

The first half of your post sounds like children ARE responsible.
The second half sound like they're not.

Could you clarify?

Children are not held accountable.

To see the heart of a child as Jesus sees it, we should heed His words; "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it."

Jesus was not implying that children are sinless, since we all—as descendants of Adam—are born in sin (Psalm 51:5). Perhaps it is rather that the heart of a young child does not have the capacity to discern good from evil (Deuteronomy 1:39)—in some way like the hearts of Adam and Eve before they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil—for by God’s grace, a young heart is cocooned for a time in the simplicity and innocence of childhood (Isaiah 7:15).

Age of accountability: Biblical view — Truth for Kids

Free download. A Biblical perspective of the stage at which a young child becomes aware of being sinful and accountable to God. Printable.

truthforkids.com

 

[GodsGrace]

You have the correct understanding.

Thanks Cosmo.
Welcome to the forum!

 

[GodsGrace]

Children are not held accountable.

Age of accountability: Biblical view — Truth for Kids

Free download. A Biblical perspective of the stage at which a young child becomes aware of being sinful and accountable to God. Printable.

truthforkids.com

I reread already Cosmo.
Agreed. My bad.
Thanks for the reply.

 

[GodsGrace]

An impure motive or desire that does not perfectly glorify God but serves rather to exalt self.

No.
Not right.
Read Romans 5:12 again.

Here's what makes an action a sin.

WHEN YOU KNOW that it's a sin you will be held accountable for it.
IF a person lies, but does not know it's a sin....will God hold them accountable?

It's the KNOWLEDGE of the conception of God's laws and what a sin is....
that makes an action be a sin.

God will hold you responsible ONLY for the light you have.
God is just and will not hold you responsible for what you cannot know.

James 4:17
17So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin.
WHOEVER KNOWS the right thing to do

James 3:1
1Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness.
The more we know...the more accountable we'll be.

Colossians 3:16
16Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom,,,
THE WORD must dwell in us in order to be taught in wisdom.

 

[GodsGrace]

The SIN nature is not a sin. Lol. "Sin" nature.

Give that some thought and prayer for a bit.

Please read my post no. 14

The SIN NATURE IS NOT a sin.
Having the SIN NATURE IS NOT a sin.

You don't understand what the sin nature is.
I don't care how many times you've spoken to whoever.

Also these full defenses of the sin nature:

Thread 'FOUR reasons I believe in the sinful nature. (original sin/ancestral sin/total depravity)'

Aug 17, 2023

PREFACE.

For those whom I have come across, who deny that humans have a sinful nature, that is a nature that is incapable of performing a righteously meritorious thought or action without supernatural undeserved grace from God, it all seems to stem back to the idea that, if God allows such a thing, it makes people victims instead of criminals, since no one can help sinning. And underneath that is the appeal to the idea that we can improve ourselves and polish up our genuinely good and pure nature underneath, a kind of self-esteem and self-improvement program to discover the...

• Dizerner
• Replies: 60
• Forum: Original Sin

Thread 'My criticism of Dr. Flowers: Inability and the Sin Nature'

Jul 21, 2023

I had previously addressed Dr. Flowers personally with the following:

The major sticking point for me, as a Classical Arminian, is that I strongly think "Provisionism" hides some aspects of self-righteous theology within the "nuances" of the language concerning the need for grace. Any and all denial of a need for internal grace must be met with extreme skepticism, if for no other reason than the only logical reason to deny a need for grace in any capacity, is to posit goodness and righteousness that is inherent in fallen humans. This needs to be brought out, because it is all that...

• Dizerner
• Replies: 24
• Forum: Soteriology- The Doctrine of Salvation

If you want to discuss...I'm here right now.
I'm not going to a different thread.

 

[TedT]

Romans 5:12-14
12 Therefore *, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin,
One man sinned - Adam. After he sinned both spiritual and physical death entered into the world.

and so death spread to all men, because * all sinned -
Both spiritual and physical death now afflicts all men.

Adam was in fact the third person to sin in the garden...first the serpent came with a sinful intent to beguile them and secondly Eve agreed with the serpent and ate of the poisonous fruit, and only then did Adam eat.

So I find this ordinary interpretation that Adam brought sin into the world by eating the fruit himself to be lacking as the only way I can see Adam doing that is if he brought sinfulness with him when GOD brought him to the garden as the first person to be brought and sowed him into the body HE had just made for him. I see four other hints that Adam and Eve were sinners before eating the fruit in the garden which I often share.

It does not say his sin caused others to become sinful, it says that he brought death to all sinners in this world.

Now verse 19, 19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. seems to be pretty final that
Adam made or caused many to be sinful...

But again I can offer an alternative interpretation that disarms this verse if accepted.

I contend that GOD WOULD NEVER MAKE OR CREATE US EVIL by putting us into Adam's sin or sin nature or whatever evil name you want to give to us for becoming conceived and born as human! Light cannot produce dark. Loving righteousness cannot produce evil by any means, let alone by a foolish surrogate. It makes no sense... I used to accept this interpretation because I could see no alternative but then I was introduced to PCE theology and it became clear to me how we could be sinners by our own free will decision to sin and yet be sinners from our conception.

Have you never noticed that the verb MAKE in Romans 5:19 is also defined by Strong in his concordance as H2525 kathistémi:
• to appoint one to administer an office
• to set down as, constitute, to declare, show to be
• to show or exhibit one's self
• to come forward as

all of which mean the same thing as make without using make to mean to be created that way by the disobedience of the one man. It is within the word to see that by becoming a human in Adam, they proved they were sinful; they were declared to be, shown to be, already sinners which is what I contend is the meaning of Rev 12:4-9 that all and only sinners were flung out of heaven into the earth and, according to HIS will, are slowly sown into the world as sinners for HIS pleasure as per Matt 13:36-39.

 

[Dizerner]

No. Not right. Read Romans 5:12 again. Here's what makes an action a sin.
WHEN YOU KNOW that it's a sin you will be held accountable for it. IF a person lies, but does not know it's a sin....will God hold them accountable?
It's the KNOWLEDGE of the conception of God's laws and what a sin is.... that makes an action be a sin.
God will hold you responsible ONLY for the light you have. God is just and will not hold you responsible for what you cannot know.

Romans 5:12 has nothing to do with what makes an action sin. You are very confused and thinking emotionally instead of Biblically. There could BE no "sin of ignorance" if ignorance prevented sin. Whether God grants measures of mercy towards ignorance is a separate question from whether you can sin without knowing it. God says sin is sin whether you know it or not, it doesn't make it "okay" because he is merciful. And we should not be telling God what he should or should not do, but allow God to actually be the authority instead of what we feel is "okay" for him to do.

although I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. (1 Tim. 1:13 NKJ)