My take on original sin
- Thread starter TonyChanYT
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
FAQ: Did Jesus' virgin conception isolate him from the original sin?
REPLY: Adam's disobedience isn't inherited, rather, it's merited. According to
Rom 5:12-21 Adam's entire posterity was there with him in real time as joint
principals in the act.
FAQ: If that's true, then how can 1Pet 1:19 honestly say Jesus was a lamb
without blemish or spot?
REPLY: Jesus committed no sins of his own to answer for. (John 8:29, 2Cor
5:21, Heb 4:15, 1Pet 2:22)
FAQ: Was Adam's disobedience Hell-worthy?
REPLY: The proper retribution for that particular sin is mortality. In other
words; when folks pass away, they're done with that one but they still have
to answer for their own sins at the great white throne event depicted by Rev
20:11-15.
_
FAQ: Did Jesus' virgin conception isolate him from the original sin?
REPLY: Adam's disobedience isn't inherited, rather, it's merited. According to
Rom 5:12-21 Adam's entire posterity was there with him in real time as joint
principals in the act.
FAQ: If that's true, then how can 1Pet 1:19 honestly say Jesus was a lamb
without blemish or spot?
REPLY: Jesus committed no sins of his own to answer for. (John 8:29, 2Cor
5:21, Heb 4:15, 1Pet 2:22)
FAQ: Was Adam's disobedience Hell-worthy?
REPLY: The proper retribution for that particular sin is mortality. In other
words; when folks pass away, they're done with that one but they still have
to answer for their own sins at the great white throne event depicted by Rev
20:11-15.
_
Lambano
Well-Known Member
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
FAQ: Was Mary Jesus' biological mother or his surrogate mother?
REPLY: Biological.
FAQ: How do you know that for sure?
REPLY: An angel informed Mary that her baby would be David's son and
would be given David's throne. (Luke 1:32)
However; before Mary's baby could be considered for David's throne, the
child first had to be among the king's biological descendants; no exceptions.
● Ps 89:35-36 . . Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto
David. His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before me.
● Ps 132:11 . .The Lord has sworn in truth unto David; and He will not turn
from it: "Of the fruit of your body will I set upon your throne"
The New Testament verifies that Jesus satisfies the biological requirement.
● Acts 2:29-30 . . Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the
patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us
unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn
with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he
would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.
● Rom 1:1-3 . . Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David
according to the flesh
The Greek word for "seed" is a mite ambiguous because it can refer to
spiritual progeny as well as to biological progeny; but in David's case; seed
refers to biological progeny because his was 1) the fruit of his body and 2) of
his loins according to the flesh.
FAQ: From whence did baby Jesus obtain a Y chromosome for his male
gender?
REPLY: In the beginning, Eve's entire body-- inside and out, front to back,
top to bottom, and side to side --was constructed with material taken from
Adam's body. (Gen 2:21-22) So if God could construct an entire woman
from material taken from a man's body, then it shouldn't be too difficult for
Him to construct a teensy little chromosome from a woman's body.
The beauty of it is that a Y chromosome constructed with material taken
from Mary's body wouldn't be an alien substance created ex nihilo; but
would be 100% natural, and easily traceable to David. I'm very confident
that what I suggest herein actually took place when the power of the Most
High overshadowed Jesus' mom per Luke 1:35.
FAQ: David was Mary's paternal grandfather?
REPLY: Yes.
FAQ: How do you know that for sure?
REPLY: Genesis 49:10 established the tribe of Judah for Israel's kings. Jesus
was born in that tribe. (Heb 7:14) He was also born David's son. (Luke 1:32)
OBJECTION: Luke 1:36 suggests Mary was of the tribe of Levi instead of Judah.
REPLY: Levi and Judah were Leah's offspring (Gen 35:23) i.e. Elizabeth and
Mary were cousins via the same paternal grandmother.
_
FAQ: Was Mary Jesus' biological mother or his surrogate mother?
REPLY: Biological.
FAQ: How do you know that for sure?
REPLY: An angel informed Mary that her baby would be David's son and
would be given David's throne. (Luke 1:32)
However; before Mary's baby could be considered for David's throne, the
child first had to be among the king's biological descendants; no exceptions.
● Ps 89:35-36 . . Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto
David. His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before me.
● Ps 132:11 . .The Lord has sworn in truth unto David; and He will not turn
from it: "Of the fruit of your body will I set upon your throne"
The New Testament verifies that Jesus satisfies the biological requirement.
● Acts 2:29-30 . . Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the
patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us
unto this day. Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn
with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he
would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.
● Rom 1:1-3 . . Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David
according to the flesh
The Greek word for "seed" is a mite ambiguous because it can refer to
spiritual progeny as well as to biological progeny; but in David's case; seed
refers to biological progeny because his was 1) the fruit of his body and 2) of
his loins according to the flesh.
FAQ: From whence did baby Jesus obtain a Y chromosome for his male
gender?
REPLY: In the beginning, Eve's entire body-- inside and out, front to back,
top to bottom, and side to side --was constructed with material taken from
Adam's body. (Gen 2:21-22) So if God could construct an entire woman
from material taken from a man's body, then it shouldn't be too difficult for
Him to construct a teensy little chromosome from a woman's body.
The beauty of it is that a Y chromosome constructed with material taken
from Mary's body wouldn't be an alien substance created ex nihilo; but
would be 100% natural, and easily traceable to David. I'm very confident
that what I suggest herein actually took place when the power of the Most
High overshadowed Jesus' mom per Luke 1:35.
FAQ: David was Mary's paternal grandfather?
REPLY: Yes.
FAQ: How do you know that for sure?
REPLY: Genesis 49:10 established the tribe of Judah for Israel's kings. Jesus
was born in that tribe. (Heb 7:14) He was also born David's son. (Luke 1:32)
OBJECTION: Luke 1:36 suggests Mary was of the tribe of Levi instead of Judah.
REPLY: Levi and Judah were Leah's offspring (Gen 35:23) i.e. Elizabeth and
Mary were cousins via the same paternal grandmother.
_
Last edited:
Lambano
Well-Known Member
If I understand the theology correctly, what we've inherited from our first ancestors is
- The STAIN of sin, which is a holiness concept of not being fit to be in the presence of God; and
- The INCLINATION to sin, the "adokimos" mind of Romans 1:28 that is self-centered and refuses to acknowledge God and is inclined to commit all the real-time sins listed in Romans 1:17-32.
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
.
The so-called fallen nature is commonly assumed inherited from one's
parents; in particular, one's biological father. But if that is so, then from
whence did Eve get it? She was already fully sentient and fully constructed
prior to Adam tasting the forbidden fruit so it was too late for him to pass
it on to her via reproduction.
Eve didn't get the fallen nature from the chemistry of the forbidden fruit
because when she tasted it; nothing happened. Eve went right on just as
naked and unashamed as before. It wasn't till Adam tasted the fruit that
Eve's sense of decency underwent a radical transformation.
_
The so-called fallen nature is commonly assumed inherited from one's
parents; in particular, one's biological father. But if that is so, then from
whence did Eve get it? She was already fully sentient and fully constructed
prior to Adam tasting the forbidden fruit so it was too late for him to pass
it on to her via reproduction.
Eve didn't get the fallen nature from the chemistry of the forbidden fruit
because when she tasted it; nothing happened. Eve went right on just as
naked and unashamed as before. It wasn't till Adam tasted the fruit that
Eve's sense of decency underwent a radical transformation.
_
Last edited:
Lambano
Well-Known Member
Davy
Well-Known Member
God's Word already established who was guilty of the 'original sin'...
1 John 3:8
8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.
KJV
Men's traditions about the first sin being by Adam and Eve is just that, a tradition of men.
The sin of Adam and Eve was the very first sin 'in the flesh'. That is why 'death' was imparted to ALL men born in the flesh.
So WHAT was first? Adam and Eve's sin, or death??
I'd almost bet that most of yal would say Adam and Eve's sin was first, but you'd be wrong.
Satan... is who was assigned the 'power of death' because he first sinned (Hebrews 2:14, and the above 1 John 3:8 Scripture). It for this reason Apostle John says above, that The Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. And one of the devil's works is 'death'! Satan and his angels that originally rebelled with him in the old world, before Adam ever existed, were already judged and sentenced to perish in the future "lake of fire", showing that fire was prepared for him right after he rebelled in that old world (Isaiah 30; Matthew 25:41).
1 John 3:8
8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil.
KJV
Men's traditions about the first sin being by Adam and Eve is just that, a tradition of men.
The sin of Adam and Eve was the very first sin 'in the flesh'. That is why 'death' was imparted to ALL men born in the flesh.
So WHAT was first? Adam and Eve's sin, or death??
I'd almost bet that most of yal would say Adam and Eve's sin was first, but you'd be wrong.
Satan... is who was assigned the 'power of death' because he first sinned (Hebrews 2:14, and the above 1 John 3:8 Scripture). It for this reason Apostle John says above, that The Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil. And one of the devil's works is 'death'! Satan and his angels that originally rebelled with him in the old world, before Adam ever existed, were already judged and sentenced to perish in the future "lake of fire", showing that fire was prepared for him right after he rebelled in that old world (Isaiah 30; Matthew 25:41).
It also should be noted that Melchizedek preceded the Levitical order. As such, Christ as High Priest supersedes the Levitical priesthood.
Davy
Well-Known Member
Christ Jesus was... the Melchizedek of The Old Testament that met Abraham, and blessed him, and offered Abraham "bread and wine". Hebrews 7 confirms this.
Webers_Home
Well-Known Member
Hebrews 7 does not say that. Please explain how you come to that conclusion. From the WEB:
(15) This is yet more abundantly evident, if after the likeness of Melchizedek there arises another priest,
(28) For the law appoints men as high priests who have weakness, but the word of the oath which came after the law appoints a Son forever who has been perfected.
Jesus wasn't appointed to be a priest like Melchizedek until much later, after Melchizedek had died.
Yes, but what is your understanding of it? What is the original sin to you? I am interested in your operational definition of it in your head and not the paper one in Wikipedia. Can you distinguish between these two concepts?
Similar threads
