What is the different between original sin and daily sin.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
The words and language of Ro 5:18 are self-evident and establish it themselves.
They couldn't be any clearer, as seen above.
yes they are which is why the concept of Original Sin as espoused by you and most Protestants is false and unscriptural.Skinski7 is absolutely correct both in the definition of Original Sin and that scripture nor the early Church nor the Church today ever taught Original Sin.

the context for your problem starts with Gen 3:19. God permitted Satan to have dominion over man and the world through the power of death. This is confirmed in Rom 5:12, that the CONDEMNATION OF ADAM'S SIN was DEATH. Death was man's primary problem. Vs 17of Rom 5 tells us the solution is a Gift from God. Vs 18 tells us the solution to death is life to all men. there is nothing in vs 18 that even hints at sin as being what is propagated through man.
Death is also supported by Heb 2:9, Heb 2:14-17 Christ was Incarnated, assumed our mortal human nature in order to raise it to life. I Cor 15:12-22 supports this. As does II Tim 1:10. Never is sin every mentioned as either being imputed by God, or that man is born a sinner, or that sin is what man propagates. Sin is an act against God's will. I cannot be a state of being.

Also, as I pointed out, your view denies the Incarnation since it makes Christ a born sinner in become man as we are in every respect, except He did not sin. Thus Christ cannot save us, our human nature from death if He did not assume that same mortal nature to raise it to life.

That is what is clear throughout scripture. You still have not give any support for your view, I can understand the reluctance because there is none. All you have are assertions that you cannot support with scripture.
 
Last edited:
Nov 26, 2011
3,818
62
0
Except for Ro 5:18, which is the early church.

So why don't you just give a clear explanation of Ro 5:18 without violating the text or the context.

"the result of one trespass was the condemnation of all men."


We would welcome your "puttting your money where your mouth is."
I have already addressed that verse quite a number times, the problem is that there is simply no explanation that would satisfy you because you are not yielded to truth. You are yielded to the teachings of men passed down and developed since Augustine. That is the box you are unable to leave most likely due to an emotional attachment. You don't care what the Bible teaches in harmony, you don't care what the early church taught, you don't care about the historical fact that it was Augustine who brought Original Sin into orthodoxy. All you care about is dogma and proof texts.

Anything you say is vacuous because you cannot reason through things, you have turned your mind off in favour of rote dogmatism. It is impossible to reason with the unreasonable.

Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

By the offense of Adam judgment came upon all men to condemnation. That is a true statement but the context is that the condemnation came on by way of all men following Adam's example, not that Adam automatically condemned all men.

Your interpretation of that verse has an innocent baby being condemned to the lake of fire by God for simply being born. Such an injustice does not bother you because you have seared your heart in favour of rote dogmatism. If you really want to think that the love of God is inclusive of condemning souls for no fault of their own then so be it, your god is a false god, your god is an evil figment of your imagination. You can quote Bible verses out of context until you are blue in the face but it will not change reality one bit.

If Romans 5:18 is teaching that Adam's sin automatically condemned all men then the free gift automatically comes upon all men unto justification of life. So if the first part of the verse is teaching automatic universal condemnation then the second part is teaching automatic universal salvation. Yet you won't teach that will you because you because you hold to the TULIP. The TULIP is your god, not God. You bend the word of God in accordance with what the TULIP teaches.

Let's back track a little for everyone's benefit.

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

1. Sin entered the world by one man and death by sin.
2. Death passed upon all men because all men sinned.

Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.

3. Until the law (of Moses) sin was in the world. You don't need the law of Moses to sin.
4. Sin is not counted when there is no law.
5. Yet despite no law being in the world death still reigned between Adam and Moses.
6. Death reigned over them that sinned not in the same way Adam sinned.
7. Adam was a figure of who was to come (Jesus Christ).

Adam sinned by breaking a direct command of God, a command which we could call a law. Between Adam and Moses people still sinned but they did not sin by violating a commandment because the commandments were not given yet. How did they sin? They violated the law of conscience.

Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
...
Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)

It is the conscience of men which accuses or excuses due to having the law written upon the heart. Every human being knows it is wrong to go kill their neighbour in order to use their lawn mower. That knowing is natural law through the conscience and that law utterly refutes the notion that we are "born evil" with ability to make the virtuous choice.

Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Rom 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Rom 5:17 For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ.)
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.
Rom 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.


Adam's sin bringing death upon many is contrasted to how grace brings life to many. Everyone of those verses above is in the context of example and you want proof? Well keep reading...

Rom 5:20 Moreover the law entered, that the offence might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound:
Rom 5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.

1. The law entered so that sin would become more manifest. In other words the wrongness of sin would be made clear to people because of the law. Yet even when sin was abounding grace was abounding even more, in other words even though there was wickedness in the world the grace of God, ie. his mercy and divine influence upon the hearts of men was ever present and powerful.

2. Sin reigns unto death because that is the nature of sin. You sin you die. Sin produces death, SPIRITUAL DEATH. Yet this is contrasted to how grace reigns through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ.

Let's keep reading because things become even clearer...

Rom 6:1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?

Shall we keep sinning so God's grace will keep abounding more than sin? Shall we do that? Should we do evil that good my come? How does Paul answer?

Rom 6:2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

NO! Paul answers. How could we continue to sin if we are dead to sin? Now Paul goes on to explain the MECHANIC of how Romans 5:18 actually works...

Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Rom 6:4 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.
Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
Rom 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

That is the passage most people ignore today because they don't want to do it. People want an automatic salvation by just professing a belief in Jesus. Very few realise that believing in Jesus really mean you abide in His methodology, just like Noah believed God and built the ark. Without the methodology nothing changes.

Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

The free gift. It is a wonderful free gift.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

A most marvelous and blessed free gift.

Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

The free gift is a MECHANIC or a MEANS which produces a result. The free gift is not salvation. The free gift is the MEANS to salvation. Most people hate the means, most people despise the means, most people scorn and mock the means. Most people just twist salvation into being the gift and throw the MEANS out the window together.

Romans 6 speaks of the MEANS. We are to DIE WITH CHRIST in the BAPTISM OF REPENTANCE wrought by a godly sorrow which works a crisis of conviction whereby we change our minds about sin and rebellion and CHOOSE to yield ourselves to God. That is conversion.

During conversion we crucify our old man which means we put off our old way of living a selfish life in rebellion to God and in putting that old man off through repentance we destroy the body of sin which is the habitual programming which besets a sinner. That habitual programming is destroyed once and for all through the crisis of conviction wrought in repentance. We no longer want anything to do with wickedness because we come to realise how evil, foolish and an offense to God it actually is. This is not merely saying sorry, this is the sorrow of Zacheus who was going to pay back four times what he stole in restitution, this is the sorrow of Nineveh where they put on sack cloth and ashes and proclaimed "who can tell if God will have mercy." This is the sorrow of the thief on the cross who confessed that he was getting what he deserved and that Jesus wasn't, there was no presumption that mercy would be granted. This kind of repentance is practically unknown today, this kind of repentance STOPS SIN in its tracks.

In dying with Christ in the Baptism of Repentance we can then be raised up to newness of life with Jesus Christ. This is regeneration. This is where God quickens the repentant soul back to life. God does this, not us, only God can regenerate a dead soul and forgive their sins. This is the moment we go from darkness to life and ALL THINGS become new and we are truly awakened for the first time and born again.

Very few people experience this because very few are willing to count the cost and pay that cost which is everything.

So the free gift is sitting there and can be utilised by all. The mercy seat is still open. How many will truly take advantage of it and approach God with a true heart seeking a true cleansing whereby they go and sin no more having truly been redeemed of all iniquity and made pure?

Not many because the way is narrow and the gate is strait and there be FEW who will strive to enter in thereat.
 
Last edited:

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
Except for Ro 5:18, which is the early church.

So why don't you just give a clear explanation of the meaning of Ro 5:18 without violating the text or the context.

"the result of one trespass was the condemnation of all men."


We would welcome your "puttting your money where your mouth is."
I have already addressed that verse quite a number times, the problem is that there is simply no explanation that would satisfy you
The record shows no explanation of the meaning of the verse itself.

Ro 5:18 is self-evident, and you have offered no other meaning of the verse itself.

The Skinski7ism methodology of setting walls of Scripture against Ro 5:18
won't change its self-evident meaning, for Scripture does not contradict itself.

Skinski7ism only shows its misunderstanding of the Scriptures when it sets them against themselves.










 

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
yes they are which is why
the concept of Original Sin as espoused by you and most Protestants
is false and unscriptural.
Please give the meaning without violating the words or the context in:

"the result of one trespass was condemnatnion for all men."

And don't bother with the foolish notion which confuses a universal offer of salvation
with universal salvation itself (a contradiction of much of the NT) in:

"the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all man."

Note the text does not state "gives life to all men."
 
Last edited:

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
Skinski7,
Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.The free gift. It is a wonderful free gift.Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
I don't really disagree with most of what you stated. However the two "lifes" you seem to state as the same are not the same.The former, Rom 5:18 is physical life, an eternal existance that overcomes the condemnation of death to man by Satan. This is the Gift of salvation that scripture speaks about regarding what Christ did for the world and mankind. He reverses the fall. It is why He is called the Second Adam.The phrase "eternal life" in scripture generally refers to our relationship with Christ through faith which goal is to enjoy "eternal life" with Christ for eternity. This is also a gift, but whether man receives it depends on his walk with God, just as it was with Adam in the beginning.The general rule is if it is referring to what Christ did it is always physical life and is always universal. It is why we can speak of the resurrection of the dead. All men will be raised, none will be lost due to the condemnation of death Gen 3:19 to Adam. If it is speaking about one's relationship, it is always speaking of the spiritual relationship a person has and the goal of attaining eternal life. Man has nothing to do with the former, but cannot attain eternal life except by cooperating with God through faith.
 
Sep 30, 2014
2,329
102
0
I would say it is wrong for the churches that do take the money from a vulnerable loving public, that wants to know Jesus and wants to have faith, but they see the preachers who do this terrible stuff and it turns them away from faith, those preachers judgement will not be pretty I assume and I personally know two friends that this has happened to, it's just terrible, should expose them for who they are, the spirit say try the man, to many have the blinders on.
 

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
Please give the meaning without violating the words or the context in:"the result of one trespass was condemnatnion for all men."And don't bother with the foolish notion which confuses a universal offer of salvationwith universal salvation itself (a contradiction of much of the NT) in:"the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all man."Note the text does not state "gives life to all men."
I'm not not the one violating the text and context. You need to start with Gen 3:19 so you understand just what the condemnation is. The condemnation of Adam's sin is death. Physical death, Gen 3:19. Paul then supports that condemnation of death passing to all men in Rom 5:12. In vs 13 he states clearly it is a gift and the gift was life given to all men vs 18., Nothing about sin being propagated by man, nor man being born a sinner. We are actually born mortal. Surely it was not God that imputed sin to man. Augustine borrowed heavily from the Gnostics and Manicheanism. Then the Reformers incorporated the false suppositions into Reformed theology.I Cor 15:12-22 also states the very same thing. Death was passed to all men by Adam and Christ gave life to all men. Cannot be more clear as this equation manifests. Besides that Heb 2:9, Heb 2:14-17 explains it as well. Never is sin passed down to man or imputed to man or that man is born a sinner. An impossibility since sin is not a state of being but an act agaiinst God's will.If you think your view is actually scriptural then why not support it with corroborating content. You have done nothing but give unsubstantiated assertions.
 
Last edited:

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
Please give the meaning without violating the words or the context in:

"the result of one trespass was condemnatnion for all men."

And don't bother with the foolish notion which confuses a universal offer of salvation
with universal salvation itself (a contradiction of much of the NT) in:

"the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all man."

Note the text does not state "gives life to all men."
I'm not not the one violating the text and context.
You need to start with Gen 3:19 so you understand just what the condemnation is.
The meaning of "condemnation" in Ro 5:18 is clear in both the Hebrew and the Greek.

That is what it means in Ro 5:18.

Non-responsive.

The meaning of
"The result of one trespass was condemnation for all men,"

remains unexplained by you (without violating the words or the context).
 
Last edited:

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
The meaning of "condemnation" in Ro 5:18 is clear in both the Hebrew and the Greek.

That is what it means in Ro 5:18.

Non-responsive.

The meaning of
"The result of one trespass was condemnation for all men,"

remains unexplained by you (without violating the words or the context).
Which means you don't understand the text outside of your presupposition. there is NOTHING IN THE TEXT OR CONTEXT that says man is condemned to sin. He was condemned to death by the one act of sin of Adam. The context of Rom 5:12 tells you this. Gen 3:19 states man was condemned to death, dust to dust.

You also need to disregard I Cor 15:56 because in your view, it should read that death is the sting of sin, whereas the text says that sin is the sting of death. We sin because we are mortal, not sin. Your whole view cannot be aligned with any other scripture which is why it is false.

You have no support outside of your presupposition which is why you cannot go beyond your one verse. I Cor 15:12-22 is a direct contradiction to your view as well.

Clearly you stand outside of scripture on this one. It has had the same meaning for 2000 years. It is the basis of the Incarnation of Christ becoming man. Your view denies the Incarnation. Which then denies the resurrection of the dead in the last day. It makes Christ meaningless as a Savior, a Savior of the world. John 4:42.

Explain in your view how Christ could have been Incarnated, being born of the Virgin, become man as we are in every respect, except did not sin.

Where is your corroborating scripture that says man is born a sinner, that God imputes sin to man which is not condemnation either. Your view does not even align within itself. If God imputes sin to man why would sin need to be atoned?
 
Last edited:

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
The meaning of the word "condemnation" in Ro 5:18 is clear in both the Hebrew and the Greek.

That is what it means in Ro 5:18.


Non-responsive.

The meaning of
"The result of one trespass was condemnation for all men,"

remains unexplained by you (without violating the words or the context).
Which means you don't understand the text outside of your presupposition.
there is NOTHING IN THE TEXT OR CONTEXT that says man is condemned to sin.
Agreed.

There is nothing that says man is condemned to sin in

"the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men."

< What a great example of your intellectually dishonest methodology. >

Still haven't given the meaning of the text (without violating the words or the context).
 
Last edited:

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
Agreed.

There is nothing that says man is condemned to sin in

"the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men."

< What a great example of your intellectually dishonest methodology. >

Still haven't given the meaning of the text (without violating the words or the context).
Amazing that there could even be a third meaning. Must be a completely new meaning never known before.

Enlighten us as to what man is condemned to from Rom 5:18. If it is not sin, nor death, what is the life that is the solution to the condemnation? I'm all ears as to your explanation?

Don't just state it but give scriptural corroboration of your explanation.
 

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
Agreed.

There is nothing that says man is condemned to sin in

"the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men."


< What a great example of your intellectually dishonest methodology. >

Still haven't given the meaning of the text here (without violating the words or the context).
Amazing that there could even be a third meaning. Must be a completely new meaning never known before.

Enlighten us as
to what man is condemned to from Rom 5:18. If it is not sin, nor death,
what is the life that is the solution to the condemnation? I'm all ears as to your explanation?
All mankind is condemned to death because of the guilt of Adam's sin (Ro 5:12-21).

The solution is eternal life by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-9).
 
Last edited:

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
All mankind is condemned to death because of the guilt of Adam's sin (Ro 5:12-21).

The solution is eternal life by grace through faith (Eph 2:8-9).
Guilt of the sin or the sin makes little difference. It is the death that is important. Satan took man captive through the power of death. Christ came to defeat that death and the sting of death, namely sin.
The solution is NOT eternal life by grace through faith. Faith will never grant life. If so, then you need to hold to universalism in that since all men will be raised to life in the last day, all men of necessity must have believed in order to be raised.

The purpose of Christ granting life to all men was so that man could freely choose again to be united with Him. We unite with Him through Faith.

Read very carefully I Cor 15:12-22. It explicitly states (vs 17)that faith CANNOT grant life. All the faith in the world cannot raise a man to life. ONLY the resurrection of Christ gave life to all men. All the dead will be raised in the last day to immortality and inicorruptibility, I Cor 15:52-54.

If faith was the solution then Christ would not have been needed. Christ would not have needed to be Incarnated since there was no human nature or even the world to be redeemed.

Your whole theory is simply based on a relationship. Man lost more than the ability to be united with God by faith. Man lost life, existence. Christ restored the world and man back to life, to an eternal existence so that man could be united by faith. One wonders how the world was redeemed if the only way was by faith. Can you explain how the world can have faith in Christ?

Christ did not save you personally from the Cross. He saved the world from the power of Satan, namely death. Heb 2:9, Heb 2:14-17, II Tim 1:10.

I would suggest you do a study of the Incarnation. Your view totally dismisses the Incarnation and the purpose of the Incarnation of Christ.

If you believe in the resurrection of the dead, then you have a huge contradiction in your view. If you don't you still have a huge contradiction because neither heaven nor hell would exist, except that Christ gave life to the world to reverse the fall of man and defeat Satan.
 

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Guilt of the sin or the sin makes little difference.
It is the death that is important. Satan took man captive through the power of death. Christ came to defeat that death and the sting of death, namely sin.
The solution is NOT eternal life by grace through faith. Faith will never grant life.
You don't know the NT.

Start with Jn 3:16.


If so, then you need to hold to universalism in that
since all men will be raised to life in the last day, all men of necessity must have believed in order to be raised.
You don't know the NT.

Nowhere does it state that all men are raised to eternal life.

Eternal life is Holy Spirit life in one's spirit.

The purpose of Christ granting life to all men was so that man could freely choose again to be united with Him. We unite with Him through Faith.

Read very carefully
I Cor 15:12-22 It explicitly states (vs 17)that faith CANNOT grant life. All the faith in the world cannot raise a man to life. ONLY the resurrection of Christ gave life to all men. All the dead will be raised in the last day to immortality and inicorruptibility, I Cor 15:52-54.
In 1Co 15:12-22, Paul is addressing believers on the certainty of the believer's resurrection.

Believers rise to eternal life in God.

Unbelievers also rise, but not to eternal life, they rise to eternal death
(no Holy Spirit life; i.e., separated from and enemies of God).


If faith was the solution then Christ would not have been needed.
One enters eternal life only through faith by grace, in the rebirth.

Yours is some very serious misunderstanding of the NT.
To which unorthodox sect do you subscribe?
 
Last edited:

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
Elin,

You don't know the NT.


Start with Jn 3:16.
It is quite obvious that you are the one with a lack of understanding of the NT. You hold to a false supposition of Original Sin. Now, you confuse the use of the word "life" and "eternal life". They are not the same as I have already pointed out.
John 3:16 implies the reconciliation of the world by saying "God so loved the world that He gave His only Begotton Son. For what purpose. so that those that beleive might have eternal life. Both life's are used, one implied the other stated.


You don't know the NT
Nowhere does it state that all men are raaised to eternal life.
Eternal life is Holy Spirit life in one's spirit.{/quote] more of your misunderstanding and confusion. I have never stated that all men are raised to eternal life. What I have stated is that all me are raised to life. An eternal existance. The same life of Rom 5:18 and I Cor 15:12-22. The same life that will be consumated with the resurrection of the dead in the last day. A good summary of both lifes can also be found in John 6:39 where everything that was given to Christ, (Col 1:20) which is all things will be raised in the last day and none will be lost.
However, the purpose of that life is in vs 40, those that believe and see will be raised to eternal life, meaning life with Christ.


I Cor 15:12-22, Paul is addressing believers on the certainty of the believer's resurrection.
Believers rise to eternal life in God.
Unbelievers also rise, but not to eternal life, they rise to eternal death (no Holy Spirit life; i.e., separated from and enemies of God).

You are correct that Paul is speaking TO believers, but He is addressing the work of Christ, His redemptive work, the certainty that all the dead will rise if Christ is risen. Your view is so convoluted that youi need to espouse that not all men even die. You destroy the equation that is found in I Cor 15:22. Once again you show your ignorance of the difference between "life" and "eternal life". The unbelievers cannot be raised unless they have life. Which is why all the dead will be raised because Christ gave life to our human nature which He assummed in the Incarnation and gave life through His resurrection. The text of I Cor 15:12-22 explicitly states that unless the DEAD are raised, one's faith is in vain. So faith surely cannot be the event that gives life. It grants eternal life but this is where you are confused regarding scripture.


One enters eternal life only through faith by grace, in the rebirth.


Yours is some very serious misunderstanding of the NT.
To which unorthodox sect do you subscribe?
again, irrelevant statements, out of context. We are not even addressing man's faith or how man attains eternal life. We are addressing the work of Christ through His Incarnation and resurrection in defeating death, sin and the devil. Your view seems to bypass everything Christ actually did and transfers it to man's response.
You are the ONLY one with a serious problem in understanding scripture.
I don't belong to a sect, but am Orthodox. A member of the original Church which still holds to the original Gospel as it was given in the beginning. We believe that Christ's Incarnation served a purpose and that His resurrection had content and meaning in defeating death, sin and the devil. That Christ gave life to the world and is the Savior of the world John 4:42. You have clouded your understanding with several false suppositions that have led you astray of what scripture means.


You are welcome to try to prove that life is given through faith rather than through Christ's resurrection.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
Elin,

It is quite obvious that you are the one with a lack of understanding of the NT. You hold to a false supposition of Original Sin. Now, you confuse the use of the word "life" and "eternal life". They are not the same as I have already pointed out.
John 3:16 implies the reconciliation of the world by saying "God so loved the world that He gave His only Begotton Son. For what purpose. so that those that beleive might have eternal life. Both life's are used, one implied the other stated.


You don't know the NT
Nowhere does it state that all men are raaised to eternal life.
Eternal life is Holy Spirit life in one's spirit.{/quote] more of your misunderstanding and confusion. I have never stated that all men are raised to eternal life. What I have stated is that all me are raised to life. An eternal existance. The same life of Rom 5:18 and I Cor 15:12-22. The same life that will be consumated with the resurrection of the dead in the last day. A good summary of both lifes can also be found in John 6:39 where everything that was given to Christ, (Col 1:20) which is all things will be raised in the last day and none will be lost.
However, the purpose of that life is in vs 40, those that believe and see will be raised to eternal life, meaning life with Christ.





You are correct that Paul is speaking TO believers, but He is addressing the work of Christ, His redemptive work, the certainty that all the dead will rise if Christ is risen. Your view is so convoluted that youi need to espouse that not all men even die. You destroy the equation that is found in I Cor 15:22. Once again you show your ignorance of the difference between "life" and "eternal life". The unbelievers cannot be raised unless they have life. Which is why all the dead will be raised because Christ gave life to our human nature which He assummed in the Incarnation and gave life through His resurrection. The text of I Cor 15:12-22 explicitly states that unless the DEAD are raised, one's faith is in vain. So faith surely cannot be the event that gives life. It grants eternal life but this is where you are confused regarding scripture.


again, irrelevant statements, out of context. We are not even addressing man's faith or how man attains eternal life. We are addressing the work of Christ through His Incarnation and resurrection in defeating death, sin and the devil. Your view seems to bypass everything Christ actually did and transfers it to man's response.
You are the ONLY one with a serious problem in understanding scripture.
I don't belong to a sect, but am Orthodox. A member of the original Church which still holds to the original Gospel as it was given in the beginning. We believe that Christ's Incarnation served a purpose and that His resurrection had content and meaning in defeating death, sin and the devil. That Christ gave life to the world and is the Savior of the world John 4:42. You have clouded your understanding with several false suppositions that have led you astray of what scripture means.


You are welcome to try to prove that life is given through faith rather than through Christ's resurrection.
Their could have been no Resurrection with out the cross. I meant he had to die in order to be ressurected and our faith must be in the cross. It get's deeper than this.
 
K

Kerry

Guest
To the OP, original sin is the sin nature that we all have. When Adam sinned all of us were in his loins and that nature of being bent or slaves to sin is in all of us. Now, by placing faith in the cross that power of sin is broken, the chains of sin are set free by the power of the blood of Christ.

Daily sin, is the fact that we are not perfect and we get angry and we say things and do things that are not of the Spirit but of our flesh. We are still human and will make mistakes, These are one time sins and we realize it and ask forgiveness yet we will see the consequence of that sin. For instance David sinned and the plague was going through Israel, but when offered sacrifice on that guy's threshing floor the plague stopped yet thousands were killed.

Sin can only be conquered by faith in the cross. If we place faith in what we do, the sin nature is revived in us and we start trying to justify it, by twisting scripture and coming up with doctrine that allows it. Because we can't stop doing it and we are saved and love God yet we keep sinning. So we come up with a form of doctrine that is not biblical and fall further from grace.

Paul talks about this in detail and said I find a law in my flesh and that is the law of sin or the sin nature. But, then talks about the law of the Spirit which will only work in the parameters of the Cross. Which sets us free from that sin nature and opens the divine nature which is the Holy Spirit producing fruit in us.

I hope you understand.
 

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
Elin,

It is quite obvious that you are the one with a lack of understanding of the NT.
You hold to a false supposition of Original Sin.
I hold to Ro 5:18.

"the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men."

you confuse the use of the word "life" and "eternal life".
Don't think so.

I Cor 15:12-22, Paul is addressing believers on the certainty of the believer's resurrection.

Believers rise to eternal life in God.
Unbelievers also rise, but not to eternal life, they rise to eternal death
(no Holy Spirit life; i.e., separated from and
enemies of God).
You are correct that Paul is speaking TO believers, but He is addressing the work of Christ, His redemptive work, the certainty that all the dead will rise if Christ is risen. Your view is so convoluted that youi need to
espouse that not all men even die.
'Tis you who confuses eternal death with human death.

Read my parenthetical statement on what is eternal death.

You destroy the equation that is found in I Cor 15:22. Once again you show your ignorance of the difference between "life" and "eternal life".
Nope. . .

Yours is the ignorance regarding the difference between eternal death and human death.

And all your misunderstanding in this regard is grounded in that error.
 
Last edited:

Cassian

Senior Member
Oct 12, 2013
1,960
7
0
Elin,


I hold to Ro 5:18.


"the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men."
So do I, but you seem to have superimposed a different meaning than scripture has ever had on the text. The condemnation was death. Paul already confirmed this in Rom 5:12. It is death that is passed on to all men, thus all men sin. It aligns with I Cor 15:56 as well as with Gen 3:19. It aligns with the death that Christ needed to defeat in Heb 2:9, Heb 2:14-17, II Tim 1:10. It aligns with the equation of I Cor 15:22 that all men die through Adam, thus all are given life through Christ.


Care to explain just how that equates to guilt of Adam's sin which you hold. Guilt is an emotional element, not a state of being. Your view has so many contradictions from based on scripture.


You may hold to your view but I have yet to see any corroborating scriptural evidence that supports your view. You have given none that refutes the Incarnation of Christ, the resurrection of Christ and that He gave life to the world, He reconciled the world back to God. Assertions are not facts.


My statement....you confuse the use of the word "life" and "eternal life".
Your answer......
Don't think so.
can you prove I am incorrect besides just an empty assertion. Can you prove that "dust to dust" of Gen 3:19 is a spiritual death which seems to be your view.


thus in Rom 5:18 you would need to hold that the LIFE given to all men was spiritual life or what scripture calls eternal life?


'Tis you who confuses eternal death with human death.
can you prove that I am incorrect. Can you prove that again, dust to dust is eternal death or spiritual death? Can you prove with scripture that the death that Christ overcame was spiritual rather than physical or our mortal state of being. Can you prove with scripture that the resurrection spoken of in I Cor 15:12-22 is a spiritual resurrection, that Christ did not actually rise physically but only spiritually from the grave. Seems so rediculous to ask these questions, yet you seem to have a difficulty in distinguishing between physical death and spiritual death, life contrasted to physical death and eternal life contrasted with the Second death or spiritual death.


I will await your full explanation.


Read my parenthetical statement on what is eternal death.
the fact that you even need to bring it up shows you do not understand the difference. Eternal death is not even possible unless Christ first gave man and the world life again. A pile of dust cannot have either eternal life or eternal death. Read I Cor 15:52-53. It is all about our mortality, our physical existence. Christ defeated physical death, to raise all men to immortal existence so that there can even be a heaven or hell. Your view denies the Incarnation, resurrection of Christ as scripture teaches it.


Nope. . .


Yours is the ignorance regarding the difference between eternal death and human death.


And all your misunderstanding in this regard is grounded in that error.
Seems this is a self conviction. It is clear that you have no understanding of how these words are used in scripture. It clouds you understanding and makes Christ's work meaningless because He accomplished nothing.


So, for you, I Cor 15:12-22 is all about only some people who died through Adam and only some people who were given life, and that death and life was spiritual and can only be gotten through faith. That the resurrection spoken of in this context is a spiritual resurrection. Man somehow lost his humanity and only exists in a spiritual reality? Explain.


Instead of empty assertions why not prove your points with scripture. You need to even show that Christ did not actually die physically but only suffered what you call eternal death. Do you even believe in the Incarnation? I must assume you don't believe Christ was really man, as we are in every respect. Explain?
 

Elin

Banned
Jan 19, 2013
11,909
141
0
Elin said:
I hold to Ro 5:18.

"the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men."
Elin,

So do I, but you seem to have superimposed a different meaning than scripture has ever had on the text.
The condemnation was death.
Yes, because of their guilt of Adam's sin.

The NT usage of "condemnation" is the judgment of God's wrath to eternal death (Jn 3:36, 18).

To repeat, eternal death is no eternal life of God in one's spirit, God's enemy, separation from God, under his wrath (Ro 5:9).

If it is only physical death, then both the believer and the unbeliever suffer the same condemnation.
Don't think so.

Paul already confirmed this in Rom 5:12.
It is death that is passed on to all men, thus all men sin.
Yes, in context Paul is saying that death proves that all men are personally guilty of sin.

But what personal guilt of sin caused men to die between Adam and Moses
when there was no law to transgress and, therefore, sin was not taken into account
(i.e., men were not guilty)?

Ro 5:12-21:

Sin is transgression of the law.
Where there is no law, there is no transgression and, therefore,
no death because of the sin of transgression.

But all died between Adam and Moses when there was no law to transgress
and, therefore, sin was not taken into account.

So based on what personal guilt of sin did they die?
On their personal guilt of Adam's sin.

Care to explain just how that equates to guilt of Adam's sin which you hold.
See Ro 6:23, and 5:12-21, above..

Guilt is an emotional element, not a state of being.
Makin' it up as you go. . .

Tell that to the Court when the judge declares the criminal guilty.

You could use a good dictionary.

You may hold to your view but I have yet to see any corroborating scriptural evidence that supports your view.
Not surprising. . .

You have given none that refutes the Incarnation of Christ, the resurrection of Christ and that He gave life to the world, He reconciled the world back to God.
Agreed. . .straw man.

can you prove I am incorrect besides just an empty assertion.
Previously addressed here. Review it.

in Rom 5:18 you would need to hold that the LIFE given to all men was spiritual life or what scripture calls eternal life?
The Greek text of Ro 5:18 does not state the life was given to all men.

It simply states "life to all men," which is the universal offer of life to all men.