Then given that all who post here are, in a very real sense, commentators, why are you here? Any time anyone, inclyding you, says anything about a passage of scripture other than quoting it directly and only, is commenting on it. Also, if you say that the wages of sin is physical death, then you have "offered" a great deal about Genesis 3:22.
What is the essence of sin?
- Thread starter Clay
- Start date
TibiasDad
Active Member
How can one reason that other opinions are wrong if you can’t express a counter argument to theirs? That’s essentially saying nobody is correct in their interpretation of this passage, including me!
Doug
I try to restrict my opinions to what I consider to be the leading of the Holy Spirit and HE has not taught me what HE means in this line so it eludes me.
As one commentator suggested in his commentary, this line seems to be corrupted, but I have had no leading about that either. Should I accept his leading because it fits my thinking so well?
He and thee might scorn me for not stating an opinion of who is correct but I will wait on the Lord.
If I have been led in the Spirit to put my faith in a particular interpretation of HIS holiness and a line which I'm not sure what it means is used to support an argument against what HE has taught me about HIS ways, then I am very comfortable standing against that opinion of its meaning, stemming from the verse or not.
I don't know what it means but I do reject what you think it means IF it contradicts what I have been taught.
TibiasDad
Active Member
Do you hear the double speak of this statement? You say “I don’t know what it means” but then say that “if it contradicts what I have been taught”, meaning you do have an understanding of what it means, and by that understanding, you reject all other positions of understanding.
If there is a reason why you reject something, then you have a reason why you reject it. If that reason is that
then you cannot say whether is it right or wrong, because the Holy Spirit might confirm it to mean something that you have rejected.
A more honest answer would be to say, “I don’t know what this means.”
Doug
You are correct, I did state it wrong...especially since it contradicts the first paragraph of that post.
I should have written "but if it leads to a conclusion that contradicts what I've earned in the Spirit, I will reject that conclusion".
I thought that was what I wrote, sigh, because that is what I meant, a bit of supportive repetition.
Last edited:
TibiasDad
Active Member
Now the question is, ‘what specifically has the Spirit taught you that is different from what was stated and you rejected?’
Doug
praise_yeshua
Active Member
Adam was never spiritually alive before he sinned.
1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
1Co 15:46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
1Co 15:47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
Adam was a living soul. There has never been spiritual life without Christ.
The idea that Adam "lost" something he never had when he sinned is really contrary to common sense. It is nothing more than a false doctrine that has absolutely no context in Judaism nor the early church. Augustine basically originated some form of the teaching in his writings concerning "Concupiscence".
So what is your interpretation of Genesis 2:7?
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed (the body of) man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath (the spirit) of life; and man became a living soul (a living creature).
praise_yeshua
Active Member
Like I said. There is no spiritual life without Christ. Adam was made a living soul not a quickening spirit. I quoted the verses.
Why do you believe there is Eternal life without Jesus Christ?
A living soul needs spiritual life. It amazes me sometimes how disconnected such beliefs are disconnected from the Scriptures.
Was Eve a living soul? Was Abel?
What makes you think I believe that?
You are confused.
Gen 1:24 And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures (Hebrew - nephesh) according to their kinds--livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul (Hebrew - nephesh).
H5315
נֶפֶשׁ
nephesh
neh'-fesh
From H5314; properly a breathing creature, that is, animal or (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental): - any, appetite, beast, body, breath, creature, X dead (-ly), desire, X [dis-] contented, X fish, ghost, + greedy, he, heart (-y), (hath, X jeopardy of) life (X in jeopardy), lust, man, me, mind, mortality, one, own, person, pleasure, (her-, him-, my-, thy-) self, them (your) -selves, + slay, soul, + tablet, they, thing, (X she) will, X would have it.
Adam was a living soul. Eve was a living soul. Cain was a living soul. Abel was a living soul. My dog was a living soul. Animals are living souls. Human beings are living souls.
The difference between animals and human beings is that human beings have spirits formed by God and given to them.
Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath (Hebrew - neshamah) of life and man became a living soul.
H5397
נְשָׁמָה
neshâmâh
nesh-aw-maw'
From H5395; a puff, that is, wind, angry or vital breath, divine inspiration, intellect or (concretely) an animal: - blast, (that) breath (-eth), inspiration, soul, spirit.
When human beings are in focus, "soul" and "spirit" are very often used interchangeably in both the OT and the NT even though they technically have different meanings.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
Because you believe Adam had Eternal Life without the Atonement. The lack of sin doesn't = Eternal life. It simply equals innocence or the lack of culpability.
Not at all. The meaning of creation and the Atonement/Offering of Jesus Christ for humanity has been debated for a very very long time. I decided as a young man to know the Truth.
Good. I agree complete. All of them were absent Eternal Life. Even Adam had to eat. Adam was placed in a garden surrounded by things to sustain him.
You're breaking that narrative for your own traditional "Augustine" benefit. Such was never taught in Judaism. Don't ask me. Ask any "Jew."
That breath produced in Adam a "living soul".
Have you ever blew a bubble? What did you use to create that bubble? The "wind" from around you? "Oxygen"? "Nitrogen"?
Adam is of the earth. He has been from the beginning. He was weak. Never empowered by the gift of Eternal Life. The only means by which Eternal Life can be granted is through the death of another. Jesus Christ.
God's purpose in Adam wasn't to be what he was originally created. He was purposed from the very beginning to be in the likeness of God in Eternal Life. The "shell" you see Adam made of was just the beginning of God's plan.
God didn't make things "up" as He went. He knew exactly what He was doing.
Heb 9:16 For where a will is involved, the death of the one who made it must be established.
Heb 9:17 For a will takes effect only at death, since it is not in force as long as the one who made it is alive.
In Greek the word is πνοή or "wind or breath".
Last edited:
Of course it does. If one has not sinned, there is no need for atonement. There is nothing to atone for. One that has not sinned is perfect.
It is really to bad that you have not learned the truth. All the rest of what you posted there was done so in your not learning the truth. Sad.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
Sin already existed before Adam himself sinned. Sin "entered" this world. This is larger than any of us in the seed of Adam.
The Lord just keeps blessing me and loving me. Don't be sad for me.
We can continue to get into the details of this. If we do, you might just change your mind.
Remember when Jesus spoke to Nicodemus and talked about the "wind"? Don't be like Nicodemus. Don't just accept what you were taught yourself without questioning it and making it your own.
7 If you do well, will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well, sin crouches at your door; its desire is for you, but you must master it.
Genesis 4:7
Sin is defined as any action, thought, or attitude that goes against God's law and His standards. It is considered a transgression of divine law and can manifest as disobedience to God's commands or a failure to do what is right. Sin not only offends God but can also harm relationships with others, reflecting a heart inclined toward evil. In essence, sin is anything contrary to God's will and perfect character of love.
Genesis 4:7
Sin is defined as any action, thought, or attitude that goes against God's law and His standards. It is considered a transgression of divine law and can manifest as disobedience to God's commands or a failure to do what is right. Sin not only offends God but can also harm relationships with others, reflecting a heart inclined toward evil. In essence, sin is anything contrary to God's will and perfect character of love.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
The Greek word for sin simply means "miss the mark". I expect children to "miss the mark".
If you consider this in the context of
Deu 5:16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Mat 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Exo 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
Would anyone give their own child over for the judgement of "such sin"?
Aaron
Active Member
Some believe in a concept known as the "age of accountability," where children are not held responsible for their sins until they reach a certain age, and if they die before reaching that age, they may be granted entrance to heaven.
Others argue that children are always held accountable for their sins, regardless of their age, as they are born sinners due to inherited sin.
The Bible does not specify an exact age for accountability, and many believe that God knows when a child has committed a sin and is responsible for it.
Ultimately, the concept of accountability is a theological interpretation and varies among different religious perspectives.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=5071...3doZW5fY2hpbGRyZW5fYXJlX2FjY291bnRhYmxl&ntb=1
So the answer to whether children are held accountable for sin depends on individual beliefs and interpretations of scripture.
As for. .
Deu 5:16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Mat 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Exo 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
In most parts of the world today children are not given the death penalty for any crime. Islam does have honor killing.
According to some women's rights activists, honor killing is rooted in patriarchal law. For example, Article 630 of the Iranian Penal Code allows a man who witnesses his wife in the act of having sexual intercourse with another man to kill both of them if he is certain that his wife is a willing participant. Article 301 of the Code stipulates that the father and paternal grandfather are not to be retaliated against for killing the child.
Others argue that children are always held accountable for their sins, regardless of their age, as they are born sinners due to inherited sin.
The Bible does not specify an exact age for accountability, and many believe that God knows when a child has committed a sin and is responsible for it.
Ultimately, the concept of accountability is a theological interpretation and varies among different religious perspectives.
https://www.bing.com/ck/a?!&&p=5071...3doZW5fY2hpbGRyZW5fYXJlX2FjY291bnRhYmxl&ntb=1
So the answer to whether children are held accountable for sin depends on individual beliefs and interpretations of scripture.
As for. .
Deu 5:16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
Mat 15:4 For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.
Exo 21:17 And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death.
In most parts of the world today children are not given the death penalty for any crime. Islam does have honor killing.
According to some women's rights activists, honor killing is rooted in patriarchal law. For example, Article 630 of the Iranian Penal Code allows a man who witnesses his wife in the act of having sexual intercourse with another man to kill both of them if he is certain that his wife is a willing participant. Article 301 of the Code stipulates that the father and paternal grandfather are not to be retaliated against for killing the child.
Oh good grief, what does that even mean? In this world, human beings sin. That is it. There is no sin other than that.
Before the age of accountability, a child does not sin. Before that, there is nothing the child does that is counted as sin.
praise_yeshua
Active Member
I appreciate you answering. Few do.
The law is clearly stated but few consider the fact that the judgement of the law is in the "eyes of the beholder". The law itself only states a principle. It takes a "judge" to deem the circumstances applicable to the individual.
If this were our own child, we certain would think differently of the circumstances and we would ourselves treat our own children different potentially than another person's own child.
Thusly, the law is a reflection of our own bias and inner most thoughts. Love is why we wouldn't judge our own children.
Solomon dealt with this as recorded in 1 Kings 3:16-28.
1Ki 3:26 Then spake the woman whose the living child was unto the king, for her bowels yearned upon her son, and she said, O my lord, give her the living child, and in no wise slay it. But the other said, Let it be neither mine nor thine, but divide it.
1Ki 3:27 Then the king answered and said, Give her the living child, and in no wise slay it: she is the mother thereof.
1Ki 3:28 And all Israel heard of the judgment which the king had judged; and they feared the king: for they saw that the wisdom of God was in him, to do judgment.
Wisdom doesn't always take "the law" at face value. These two women were harlots. Even a harlot loves.
Jesus is a perfect example of this in
Joh 8:4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
Joh 8:5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
Joh 8:6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
Joh 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Joh 8:8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
Joh 8:9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
Joh 8:10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
Joh 8:11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
Notice how Jesus appealed to the accusers for evidence but none of them stayed around long enough to condemn the women.
Deu 19:15 One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.
This same women is probably the women detailed in Luke 7.
Luk 7:44 And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.
Luk 7:45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.
Luk 7:46 My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.
Luk 7:47 Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.
Similar threads
