|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 12:52:00 AM
|
|
|
Child4Jesus
Posts: 470
Joined: 5/24/2005
From: Long Island, Nassau, Elmont, NY
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Theo-Minor
Look folks ... Sins are not accidental. We know them before we commit them, and we commit them by choice. We desire to commit them while knowing we should not. Because they are desirable, they are tempting. People aren't "tempted" to do good things. By the very nature of the word, temptation has connotations towards evil things.
Jesus was tempted. He was tempted because he desired to do things against God's will. He was not "tempted" to do righteously. He did righteously in obedience to God, despite his own desires and temptations inherent in the flesh. If you claim that Jesus didn't have the same nature as we, then he wasn't tempted as we are. If he wasn't tempted as we are, then scripture stating otherwise in Hebrews is false. If said scripture is false, then the Bible itself becomes a teetering platform on which to base our beliefs. It's commendable to defend a doctrine that sounds good, but the fact that Jesus suffered from our malady is a mathematical certainty, else scripture in general is fictitious, seeing that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
I don't think I could agree with you more.
Let me jump in. I'm jumping in blind so.
First like some in this thread I don't think the bible teaches anything about a sin nature. I believe where the idea of a sin nature comes from is the original sin doctrine which states that all humans are guilty of Adams sin. That is so false. Scripture clearly teaches that each person is guilty for his own sin that he has committed. Read Ezekiel 18. It couldn't be more clear.
Another thing is people saying that Jesus couldn't have sinned. Scripture clearly teaches that He was tempted. In Hebrews and when He was in the dessert. If He could not have sinned then the temptations meant nothing. That fact that He didn't sin which is part of Him proving His Messiahship is greater than saying He could not have sinned because if He is incapable of sinning overcoming temptation doesn't mean anything.
_____________________________
In Christ,
Richad
The greatest heresy to American Christianity is that if you ask Jesus to come into your heart, he definitely will.
Paul Washer
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 1:31:58 AM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5940
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
The sin nature is apparent in the fact one MUST be born again to enter the Kingdom, made A NEW creature in Christ, the OLD has passed away and all this is only possible by the blood of Christ...
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 1:33:21 AM
|
|
|
dwain
Posts: 103
Joined: 3/4/2006
Status: offline
|
Tempted to answer up it appears we are all. This is unbelieveable.
Yes, mathmatics,
2 possibilities- nevermind, [Son of God Son of Man]
Seed of David according to the flesh
Son of God according to the spirit of Holiness
To you who contradict the word of God in a blatant way- You need to fast AND pray.
< Message edited by dwain -- 11/29/2008 3:22:01 PM >
_____________________________
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~dwainfred/thegoodnewsofjesuschrist/
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~dwainfred/
Deut. 33:27 The eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 1:33:49 AM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5940
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Child4Jesus
quote:
ORIGINAL: Theo-Minor
Look folks ... Sins are not accidental. We know them before we commit them, and we commit them by choice. We desire to commit them while knowing we should not. Because they are desirable, they are tempting. People aren't "tempted" to do good things. By the very nature of the word, temptation has connotations towards evil things.
Jesus was tempted. He was tempted because he desired to do things against God's will. He was not "tempted" to do righteously. He did righteously in obedience to God, despite his own desires and temptations inherent in the flesh. If you claim that Jesus didn't have the same nature as we, then he wasn't tempted as we are. If he wasn't tempted as we are, then scripture stating otherwise in Hebrews is false. If said scripture is false, then the Bible itself becomes a teetering platform on which to base our beliefs. It's commendable to defend a doctrine that sounds good, but the fact that Jesus suffered from our malady is a mathematical certainty, else scripture in general is fictitious, seeing that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link.
I don't think I could agree with you more.
Let me jump in. I'm jumping in blind so.
First like some in this thread I don't think the bible teaches anything about a sin nature. I believe where the idea of a sin nature comes from is the original sin doctrine which states that all humans are guilty of Adams sin. That is so false. Scripture clearly teaches that each person is guilty for his own sin that he has committed. Read Ezekiel 18. It couldn't be more clear.
Another thing is people saying that Jesus couldn't have sinned. Scripture clearly teaches that He was tempted. In Hebrews and when He was in the dessert. If He could not have sinned then the temptations meant nothing. That fact that He didn't sin which is part of Him proving His Messiahship is greater than saying He could not have sinned because if He is incapable of sinning overcoming temptation doesn't mean anything.
Is God who He is based on His actions, or simply because He's God? If I treated my son like God did Job(His child) would I be wrong?
_____________________________
John
Proverbs 12:10 A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 1:57:26 AM
|
|
|
OneOfHisJewels
Posts: 2958
Joined: 8/9/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
In Hebrews and when He was in the dessert.
Jesus was never in your pie a la mode. Dessert is the sweet stuff you eat after dinner DESERT is that barren, dry land place.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 2:15:39 AM
|
|
|
Him4all
Posts: 479
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Nateyisrael,
quote:
I am sorry if I misunderstood what you were saying when you said sinful nature you meant it should be translated as flesh. But you are still saying he had a sinful nature. I believe I am only saying what the scriptures say:
ROM 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
quote:
Above you said the death that God was talking about was physical so if it was physical you are saying Christ sinned thats why he died consciously or unconsciously, No, I'm not saying he sinned. I'm saying he paid the price for sin which was physical death. And to pay that price, he too had to die. What made his death substitutional for us, is the fact that he didn't sin. That's also what avails us to a new glorified physical body, after the resurrection.
quote:
So can I have a sinful flesh and not sin? That is why we need to be born again. I believe that after you're born again you still have sinful flesh but you do not have to sin ever again...just like Jesus did not sin.
quote:
What does only begotten mean to you? was he begotten the same way we are? And If he was begotten the same way we are why is he called the ONLY ONLY Begotten Son?
Begotten has to do with the resurrected body.
REV 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead,
Jesus was the first and only 'begotten' of the Father. But we aren't begotten of the Father, we are begotten of Jesus the Christ because of his vicarious atonement.
quote:
Paul told timothy to rightly divide the word of truth. So if you are not getting scriptures upon scriptures and lines upon line here a little and there a little. I still don't think you understand...'dividing the truth' is 'deductive thinking' and not 'inductive thinking'. Inductive thinking is 'line upon line ect...and people doing that are not "weaned from the milk or drawn from the breast."
quote:
Teach me how to rightly divide the word of truth because Paul commanded timothy to rightly divide the word. No human can 'teach' you 'dividing'. It must come by revelation from above by the annointing within.
1JO 2:27 but the anointing which you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that any one should teach you; as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie, just as it has taught you, abide in him.
I hope this is making some sense, I believe it is a teaching known by few.
DR
_____________________________
When you violate LOVE you violate GOD.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 10:52:28 AM
|
|
|
KingJamesBond
Posts: 1782
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
|
SovereignIsHe,
quote:
The sin nature is apparent in the fact one MUST be born again to enter the Kingdom, made A NEW creature in Christ, the OLD has passed away and all this is only possible by the blood of Christ...
I like it that your post was not huge and had only one sentence. LOL
But most of all I liked how it went right to the point and pointed out the real TRUTH!
KJB
_____________________________
Thank God we don't get as much Government as we pay for! -Will Rogers
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 11:47:05 AM
|
|
|
KingJamesBond
Posts: 1782
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
|
Him4all,
I think Nateyisrael said the following;
quote:
I am sorry if I misunderstood what you were saying when you said sinful nature you meant it should be translated as flesh.
But you are still saying he had a sinful nature.
You replied with this text;
quote:
ROM 8:3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
It seems like some people on this thread are ready to claim that Jesus came with a sinful nature but humans dont?
Romans 8:3 is making a great point to show the weakness of the flesh (sinful nature) of man and what could not be done. That is this part: For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh,
The law could not save anybody and it is not because the law is evil natured. The law is good natured. The law is great. The nature of the law is perfect.
It is fallen man that cannot keep it. Therefore the law cannot impart life to man.
The law when held against any man at all.....even the greatest and most powerful man you can ever imagine kills him right on the spot. Men do not stand a chance if they are held up against the law and all men will be declared guilty if held against the law.
The other part of the text is showing the contrast of a real and perfect nature even though it is in human flesh. That is this part: God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:
The difference in contrast is not the flesh. Jesus had flesh and we have flesh. The difference is in the nature. Jesus is God and we are not.
Jesus was under the law but the law had no power over Him at all. Why?
Because He is fully God. God has a perfect nature. It is flawless. As a matter of fact....He is the law!
He came in the likeness of sinful man but with the nature of God because He is God.
As much as some people (including yourself) on this thread might not like the NIV, it is a pretty good translation of the situation;
3For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering.
Man could not do it because of the weak sinful nature of man. It is impossible for man to do it because of the nature of man.
But its not impossible for God. Jesus was in the likeness of sinful man but without the sinful part. God is not sinful. There was no sin in Him. It is not in His nature to sin......ever!
The text continues;
And so he condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit.
Those who live according to the sinful nature have their minds set on what that nature desires; but those who live in accordance with the Spirit have their minds set on what the Spirit desires.
The mind of sinful man is death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace; the sinful mind is hostile to God.
It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.
Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.
You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you.
here are some points made in this thread;
quote:
I absolutely believe that anyone could have lived as Jesus lived.
Any of us, from the time of childhood, could have kept the law and lived without sin.
quote:
Some disagree with that, but it is a biblical fact nonetheless that the law was keepable, and we have all sinned by choice.
It's not that no one could keep the law,.....
Any of us from the time of childhood could have kept the law and lived without sin?
These teachings are totally off the rocker. 
The Bible says this;
....no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law....
I would hope as Christians we would just bow down to God and agree with that. Why fight it?
Once we know we are wicked and cannot keep the law we can know the Bible also says this;
However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.
It is the truth no matter what people try to tell us.
People hate the idea of God calling them wicked and they constantly strive and strive and put on delusional facades that they are some sort of virtue wielding "strong men".
I never seem to find enough people that have so much faith in themselves and their ability.
They are just everywhere.
God is not fooled nor mocked by delusional facades.
God is pleased when people have faith in Him and not in themselves.
All we have to do is bow down and deny ourselves and trust Him.
We should not think too highly of ourselves because in reality we were by nature children of wrath.
Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you.
Isnt it much better to rest in Jesus Christ?
His yoke is easy; His burden is light.
Put me against the law and I am yoked alright...........right around the neck!
Take care,
KJB
_____________________________
Thank God we don't get as much Government as we pay for! -Will Rogers
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 1:26:16 PM
|
|
|
GHitch
Posts: 273
Joined: 7/6/2008
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KingJamesBond
Conclusion number one is that God does not have to share His heavenly realm with anyone (including infants) unless He wants to and it is perfectly fair and right if He does not.  In other words, God can send babies to hell if he likes? Totally wrong. God cannot and does not do wrong.
quote:
No...Jesus Christ was fully God and became fully man. He was by nature fully God and stooped low to become a man. There is a big difference between us and Him. We are by nature fully men and it ends there as we do not become God. What you are teaching is more like Mormonism. So you're saying the contrary to scripture? Christ was in fact NOT made like his brethren in all things and thus was not fully man at all?
quote:
We are not fully God or Gods and that is what this thread is trying to imply we are. Worse and worse. Not one single post ever claims any such thing.
quote:
Being God Jesus did not loose any God nature at all even though He became a man. By His nature He is not only perfect but is able to remain perfect. There is nothing imperfect about Him even though He was in the flesh. So what's your point? No one contests this.
quote:
The only way you can prove they come with an innocent nature and nothing of an evil nature is to show that any and all evil comes from outside of them and there is no evil within them. That is poor logic and a gross misunderstanding of both scripture and the nature of sin.
Here's a question for you that I hope will help you see this:
Q: Before Lucifer sinned, he was in heaven, pure and holy and without sin right? So where did the evil come from?
By your logic he was necessarily "born" with it.
Your whole implication is that no one can sin freely, unless the sin is already there by nature. Totally unscriptural and totally illogical.
quote:
Why is that? Because the human heart is evil by nature. You just cannot get around that and that is why God can guarantee that no one will be made right by keeping the law. It will not happen. He knows it, and we aint gunna change it. Sorry but you cannot escape the conclusions of your reasoning. Which are that no one is in fact responsible for their sin for they are by nature unable to do otherwise. Apply that to your family see how far you get. Try using your system in a court of justice. Thankfully this post-modern like doctrine doesn't fly. It is doctrine like this in our courts (based on materialist post modern thought) that allows "poor helpless criminals" to go free - its not their fault, its their parents, their grandparents, society, a traumatic childhood - they were natural born killers!! You've simply taken this thought into your biblical interpretations - interpreting scripture based on post modernism's "evil is in the genes" nonsense. Why do you think in America "not one is responsible for their acts" anymore!?!
quote:
So whether you like it or not that is how babies come naturally.....in the flesh. Again you're implying that flesh and blood are themselves evil.
And please stop preaching the new birth to me, I know both the doctrine and the experience quite well. You've got your doctrines all mixed up.
quote:
That Spirit is the entire difference.....not man. Indeed, and that is a completely different subject.
quote:
It needs no explaining. Another escapist tactic. Are these little children "such is the kingdom of heaven" of wrath or not? You say yes, Jesus says no.
You refuse to answer whether babies go to hell for their being born in sin, you refuse to answer the words of Christ as though he meant something other than what he said. You're on slippery grounds indeed.
quote:
Jesus Christ was and is perfection and His nature is perfect. Ours does not come like that at all. He was made like unto his brethren in ALL things, says the scripture. But you say the opposite, he was NOT made like us in all things. Good luck with that error.
Fully man, yet fully God. You're claiming that he was not fully man, made under the law - Gal 4:4 "But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law," Heb 2:14 quote:
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
quote:
For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth." Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use? What is your point? I know these texts very well. Your meaning appears to be that God can cause men to sin then blame them for it? Shame! He himself would thus be responsible for that sin and thus guilty. You seriously misunderstand this passage and you thus make God the author of all sin.
Suggest you at the original Hebrew of the original Exodus texts, you will get a very different interpretation.
Pharaoh's heart (inner man) was "strengthened" châzaq, in the choice he had already made in himself. God did not change anything of Pharaoh's intentions.
quote:
Well, if you want to prove to God you can keep them go ahead. Your escapist tactics are becoming more and more glaring in the light of both scripture and reason.
Your next quotes just serve to further demonstrate that either did not read what I wrote on this or you didn't understand it.
quote:
I dont need to make any up. I just teach them from what God said and they seem to be quite conscious. Do you EVER actually read what is posted here or are you just making this up as you go along for the sake of hanging on to your security blanket of personal doctrines for fear they might be exposed as incorrect, illogical and unreasonable?
I'll take that answer to mean that you actually do understand very well that if you assign impracticable laws, with the ensuing unrighteous punishments, you have made yourself unrighteous and unjust to the highest degree. You simply refuse to admit it because your hyper Calvinist doctrines will not allow it.
I certainly hope you don't practice what you preach, in imitating this strange view of God you entertain, upon your own family and others. Impracticable laws indeed, your view makes God to be a monster of iniquity.
This hyper Calvinist post-modern influenced doctrine gives criminals all the excuses they need to plead not guilty by reason of genetic defects that prevented them from keeping the law and obliged them by nature to do wrong!
May the good and righteous and oh so reasonable Lord of Armies enlighten you on these things.
_____________________________
"The formation within geological time of a human body, by the laws of physics..., starting from a random distribution of elementary particles and the field, is as unlikely as the separation by chance of the atmosphere into its components." Kurt Godel
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 1:54:26 PM
|
|
|
Him4all
Posts: 479
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
KingJamesBond,
quote:
The difference in contrast is not the flesh. Jesus had flesh and we have flesh. The difference is in the nature. Jesus is God and we are not. This going to fly like a rock but it is what I personally believe...Jesus is God now...an empahtic Yes!, but I just don't believe he was God on earth (the time between 'birth and the cross'). I believe that Philipians makes that clear enough for me.
PHI 2:6 who, though he was (past tense) in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
"In the begining was the word"...not Jesus. "...and the word was God"...not Jesus. Then the word/God gave up 'being God equal' and became a 'sinful flesh' man/Jesus. The only difference with Jesus and unregenerated man, is this...his spirit was not in need of a 'new birth' and our spirit is. He was born with the equivalent of a 'born again' spirit. That's why Hebrews says HEB 2:17 Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, When do we become a brother/brethren with Jesus? It's when our spirit too, is 'born again' from above.
His 'spirit' is what made him the 'son of God' and his 'sinful flesh' is what made him a 'son of man'. Our 'born again spirits' are what make us children of God and our 'sinful flesh' will always contend with the "divine nature" of our 'spirits' as we strive to become "partakers of" it.
Is Jesus God now? I think that 'since the cross', the answer is an affirmative Yes!
PHI 2:8 And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name,
The 'name above every name' is equal to saying 'the authority/character' above all. The Father and Spirit didn't put on 'sinful flesh' and overcome it...the Word did.
I don't want to argue any of the above, I'm just saying it works for me. I cannot accept God as having 'sinful flesh' or a 'sin nature'...whatever one wants to call it. 
quote:
Any of us from the time of childhood could have kept the law and lived without sin?
These teachings are totally off the rocker. I agree.
DR
_____________________________
When you violate LOVE you violate GOD.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 1:56:16 PM
|
|
|
AbbyGrace
Posts: 660
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Him4all
KingJamesBond,
quote:
The difference in contrast is not the flesh. Jesus had flesh and we have flesh. The difference is in the nature. Jesus is God and we are not. This going to fly like a rock but it is what I personally believe...Jesus is God now...an empahtic Yes!, but I just don't believe he was God on earth (the time between 'birth and the cross'). I believe that Philipians makes that clear enough for me.
PHI 2:6 who, though he was (past tense) in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
"In the begining was the word"...not Jesus. "...and the word was God"...not Jesus. Then the word/God gave up 'being God equal' and became a 'sinful flesh' man/Jesus. The only difference with Jesus and unregenerated man, is this...his spirit was not in need of a 'new birth' and our spirit is. He was born with the equivalent of a 'born again' spirit. That's why Hebrews says HEB 2:17 Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, When do we become a brother/brethren with Jesus? It's when our spirit too, is 'born again' from above.
His 'spirit' is what made him the 'son of God' and his 'sinful flesh' is what made him a 'son of man'. Our 'born again spirits' are what make us children of God and our 'sinful flesh' will always contend with the "divine nature" of our 'spirits' as we strive to become "partakers of" it.
Is Jesus God now? I think that 'since the cross', the answer is an affirmative Yes!
PHI 2:8 And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name,
The 'name above every name' is equal to saying 'the authority/character' above all. The Father and Spirit didn't put on 'sinful flesh' and overcome it...the Word did.
I don't want to argue any of the above, I'm just saying it works for me. I cannot accept God as having 'sinful flesh' or a 'sin nature'...whatever one wants to call it.
quote:
Any of us from the time of childhood could have kept the law and lived without sin?
These teachings are totally off the rocker. I agree.
DR
DO WHAT!?!?!? You dont believe, that He was God on earth? Are you serious?
_____________________________
Hebrews 12:14 "Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no one will see the Lord." 
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 2:17:19 PM
|
|
|
Him4all
Posts: 479
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
Abbygrace,
quote:
DO WHAT!?!?!? You dont believe, that He was God on earth? Are you serious? Am I serious? Actually, I thought I made that point pretty clear. Even 'scripturally' clear...oh well, maybe not.
And, like I said, it's off topic and I'm not interested in arguing about it. I hope that point is at least clear and acceptable. 
DR
_____________________________
When you violate LOVE you violate GOD.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 2:58:17 PM
|
|
|
benelchi
Posts: 3636
Joined: 9/14/2007
From: California
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Him4all
KingJamesBond,
quote:
The difference in contrast is not the flesh. Jesus had flesh and we have flesh. The difference is in the nature. Jesus is God and we are not. This going to fly like a rock but it is what I personally believe...Jesus is God now...an empahtic Yes!, but I just don't believe he was God on earth (the time between 'birth and the cross'). I believe that Philipians makes that clear enough for me.
PHI 2:6 who, though he was (past tense) in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped,
7 but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
"In the begining was the word"...not Jesus. "...and the word was God"...not Jesus. Then the word/God gave up 'being God equal' and became a 'sinful flesh' man/Jesus. The only difference with Jesus and unregenerated man, is this...his spirit was not in need of a 'new birth' and our spirit is. He was born with the equivalent of a 'born again' spirit. That's why Hebrews says HEB 2:17 Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect, When do we become a brother/brethren with Jesus? It's when our spirit too, is 'born again' from above.
His 'spirit' is what made him the 'son of God' and his 'sinful flesh' is what made him a 'son of man'. Our 'born again spirits' are what make us children of God and our 'sinful flesh' will always contend with the "divine nature" of our 'spirits' as we strive to become "partakers of" it.
Is Jesus God now? I think that 'since the cross', the answer is an affirmative Yes!
PHI 2:8 And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name,
The 'name above every name' is equal to saying 'the authority/character' above all. The Father and Spirit didn't put on 'sinful flesh' and overcome it...the Word did.
I don't want to argue any of the above, I'm just saying it works for me. I cannot accept God as having 'sinful flesh' or a 'sin nature'...whatever one wants to call it.
quote:
Any of us from the time of childhood could have kept the law and lived without sin?
These teachings are totally off the rocker. I agree.
DR
The text doesn't say "sinful flesh" and the idea that all flesh is "sinful" is called Gnosticism; it has been considered a heretical teaching since the very beginning of the church.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 3:05:07 PM
|
|
|
MrFribbles
Posts: 1886
Joined: 1/29/2007
From: Hawaii, but I've moved around since then
Status: offline
|
quote:
Well then maybe a "New Thread" needs to be started.
I quite agree. This is a pretty serious false understanding, and it really ought to be addressed.
_____________________________
You're a door without a key,
A field without a fence.
You've made a holy fool of me,
And I've thanked you ever since.
- Aaron Weiss
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 3:07:07 PM
|
|
|
Robert_G
Posts: 189
Joined: 1/8/2006
From: British Columbia, Canada
Status: offline
|
Here is a simple perspective on Jesus and sinning.
Because he was fully human, he was able to sin and be tempted.
Because he was fully God, and ONLY because he was fully God, was he completely able to overcome sin, and not give in to it.
Nothing more, nothing less.
_____________________________
..............
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 3:21:11 PM
|
|
|
KingJamesBond
Posts: 1782
Joined: 12/2/2006
Status: offline
|
GHitch,
quote:
In other words, God can send babies to hell if he likes? Totally wrong. God cannot and does not do wrong.
Your idea of babies fresh out of the womb being fit enough for heaven is not correct.
No matter how clean the hospital is or how hard the nurses and doctors work to keep out deadly bacteria, the deadly sin nature is something they just cant get rid of.
We already have an ancient memo on this issue as Jesus declared without any apology at all that being born the first time (like little cute babies are) is just not good enough to see the kingdom of God.
Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again."
In the first birth, flesh only gives birth to flesh. Sorry to disappoint you on that.
God can send every baby to hell, every baby to heaven, split them so that half go to heaven and half go to hell.....or whatever He wants and He is good. He is not wrong in how He chooses to do it.
The whole of creation is His design and His to do with as He wills.....not ours.
If He does not feel that the first birth is good enough to allow humans into heaven....good for Him!
Hey......its His heaven!
You and I are not His legal advisors, His boss, His judge, His jury, and He is not under our jurisdiction.
Nicodemus questioned the same concept and Jesus did not back down. I am not a famous and grand teacher like Nicodemus was, but I am not going to argue about it with Jesus.
If He says the first birth is not good enough.......I am just going to agree with Him. Babies are just not good enough to get into heaven. No one can see unless they are born again.
Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. You should not be surprised at my saying, 'You must be born again.
Maybe people can send Jesus a memo (e-mail?) and let Him know just how much they do not agree that babies should need to be born again. They can let Him know they are quite satisfied in the first condition of infants and have all decided that infants are good and clean and innocent enough for heaven. I am sure He will consider the memos in light of the deep down feelings people hold dear in their hearts and give them an exemption.
The new memo might read; no one can see the kingdom of God (except for babies) unless he is born again and has an entrance visa.
quote:
So you're saying the contrary to scripture? Christ was in fact NOT made like his brethren in all things and thus was not fully man at all?
I dont see where I said that. Look at my quote (the one you quoted) "Jesus Christ was fully God and became fully man."
The text is clear that He had no sin in Him.
Scripture says;
21God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
It does not mean He was a sinner or had His own sin or sin nature. It means He took our sin on Himself. Its not trying to say He could have sinned or it was His nature to be sinful. Sin is the exact opposite nature of God.
quote:
Here's a question for you that I hope will help you see this:
Q: Before Lucifer sinned, he was in heaven, pure and holy and without sin right? So where did the evil come from?
By your logic he was necessarily "born" with it.
Your whole implication is that no one can sin freely, unless the sin is already there by nature. Totally unscriptural and totally illogical.
The Bible is not clear on every specific detail on that. All we know is that sin was found in him. It does not clarfiy if it came from without, was created from within, or if Satan was created with options, or it was determined to be. The text is not perfectly clear on all the causes but by using other Biblical text I am one that would see the determined will of God. God created Satan.
quote:
Sorry but you cannot escape the conclusions of your reasoning. Which are that no one is in fact responsible for their sin for they are by nature unable to do otherwise. Apply that to your family see how far you get. Try using your system in a court of justice. Thankfully this post-modern like doctrine doesn't fly. It is doctrine like this in our courts (based on materialist post modern thought) that allows "poor helpless criminals" to go free - its not their fault, its their parents, their grandparents, society, a traumatic childhood - they were natural born killers!! You've simply taken this thought into your biblical interpretations - interpreting scripture based on post modernism's "evil is in the genes" nonsense. Why do you think in America "not one is responsible for their acts" anymore!?!
I dont know how you came up with all of that in one breath. No one will be justified by keeping the law. People will be responsible for breaking it. When held to the law of God everybody will be called guilty.
It is not my court system so I dont know what to tell you about that. I suggest that you love your neighbor as yourself because it is the right thing to do. I might add that you will fail. I myself wish to be under grace because I already know myself. If you wish to be under the law......have at it buddy! Dont let me stop you.
If you want to stand in the courtroom of God and and plead for justice you have a much bigger head on your shoulders than I do. I wonder it it will fit through the courtroom doors?
When I get there I am falling on my knees and pleading for mercy buddy!
I need the mercy of the court and I know it.
We aint talking about running traffic signals and spending weeks or years in some American prison with libraries, three hots and a cot, and free medical and dental care! 
quote:
This hyper Calvinist post-modern influenced doctrine gives criminals all the excuses they need to plead not guilty by reason of genetic defects that prevented them from keeping the law and obliged them by nature to do wrong!
I dont remember pleading not guilty.
Have fun.
KJB
_____________________________
Thank God we don't get as much Government as we pay for! -Will Rogers
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 3:22:44 PM
|
|
|
DrIjames
Posts: 44
Joined: 11/16/2008
Status: offline
|
Hi and greetings in His name. I would like to reply to this post, I however have some post that I would like to reply to, but there is no tab for it? I received a pm earlier that was kind of rude about me sending pm but not being able to post. I do not know why some post have no reply tab, but as a retired person that has M.S., I ask that every one be patient while I learn to use this site. thank you. Romans 6:12says "let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the LUSTS thereof" this tells us that as Christians we can choose to let sin reign, the word reign here is the Aramaic word, "basileuo" which translated means to "rule" there is a sin nature, but when we accept Christ, that is the nature that has been crucified with Him. There is a flow in this world that is constantly moving away from God. and as Christians, if we choose to relax, we too can be caugth up in this flow. As for Christ's temptation. It was real and very hard on Him. the bible says that He was tempted in every way that we are tempted. !1 John 2:16, helps us to understand this even more. There are three ways in which He and we are tempted. they are listed here in this scripture. we also are tempted in the same way.
James 1:14 SAYS THAT "...EVERY man is tempted, when he is DRAWN, away of his OWN , lust, and enticed" the word enticed is the Greek word, "deleazo", which translated means "entrapped; allured. The one thing that God has put on my heart is, 2 Corinthians 10:4, We need weapons to fight, the good fight of faith. but looking at verse 4 and 5 we see there are steps to temptation , which is what we fight at times just like Paul did and Jesus Himself. It is the mind that is the devils battler ground, while the spirit of man is the candle of the Lord. because the mind is the enemy's battle ground we need to do as David and hide His word in our hearts THAT WE MIGHT NOT SIN AGAINST HIM. In this passage we see that our weapons are mighty to the (1) "pulling down of strong holds. (2) casting down imaginations and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of G-d, and (3) bringing into captivity every, THOUGHT, to the obedience of Christ. So we see that when we have a thought that is contrary to G-d's word, (drawn away of our OWN lust) we should stop and bring this into captivity to the Word of G-d. If we fail to do this, say your trying to give up smoking, then it becomes an imagination, some thing that we are contemplating and we are dwelling on the thing forbidden og G-d. If we fail to get this under control, then it becomes a strong hold. Yet G-d in His great mercy and love has then said that still the weapons of our warfare are MIGHTY. Praise G-d.
I
|
|
|
|
|
RE: there's no sin nature - 11/29/2008 3:27:18 PM
|
|
|
AbbyGrace
| | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
