ECT The Most Misunderstood Passage in the Bible--Romans 5:12-18

[God's Truth]

Well, you're wrong. Esau IS Edom and it was Edom that terrorized God's chosen people. There were two NATIONS in her womb. Can it get any plainer than that?

It was the NATION (one of the two in Rebekah's womb) that God hated. Read these verses if you aren't too proud to do so.

Ezekiel 25:12 Thus saith the Lord God; Because that Edom hath dealt against the house of Judah by taking vengeance, and hath greatly offended, and revenged himself upon them;

Ezekiel 25:13 Therefore thus saith the Lord God; I will also stretch out mine hand upon Edom, and will cut off man and beast from it; and I will make it desolate from Teman; and they of Dedan shall fall by the sword.

Ezekiel 25:14 And I will lay my vengeance upon Edom by the hand of my people Israel: and they shall do in Edom according to mine anger and according to my fury; and they shall know my vengeance, saith the Lord God.

Ezekiel 32:29 There is Edom, her kings, and all her princes, which with their might are laid by them that were slain by the sword: they shall lie with the uncircumcised, and with them that go down to the pit.​

There was Esau in her womb and Jacob.

They are different and they would be leaders of nations made up from their own descendants.

 

[Shasta]

Like you said "doesn't necessarily"
However, if you take Paul's teaching in Romans into consideration then it is easy to see that Paul is again contrasting the spirit we all have in Christ with the flesh we still have. The battle is not between the flesh and the Holy Spirit because that is not even a match. The battle is between our new nature known as the "newborn human spirit" and the old nature called the "flesh" or the "sin nature" little buddy.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

I am just saying the word "spirit" cannot be defined on the basis of the presence or absence of the definite article. I agree with your assessment about the meaning when it comes to the battle between our old and new natures.

 

[Shasta]

Some thoughts, shasta...

What I have found over the years is that...

Where any one passage affirming, or based on a particular doctrine, contains additional words as additional information...

...including, but not limited to, a definite article...

...but another passage does not contain the additional wording, definite article, etc....

...one of the two determines the sense intended by the other.

My own experience with that over the years is that the former of those two sheds further light on the intended sense or meaning of the latter one, and is therefore the preferred intended sense of the two.

And there are many issues; not just those two.

As when you find the issue, for example, of two different definite articles found being used for a similar word and or expression.

As in wording such as "a dispensation" and "the dispensation."

In which case, which of the two is found used more often, is what determines which of the two is the intended sense of both, despite their different definite article.

And there is also the issue of synonyms - of two different words used within a similar context.

Though the two words might differ - even in their normal use, nevertheless, where they are found being used, and in light of what is being talked about when they are then brought up, gives them their intended sense, both in that particular context, and any similar one.

Case in point, 1 Cor. 12's "dividing to every man severally as he will" and 2 Tim. 2's "of these things put them in remembrance...rightly dividing the word of truth..."

In both places, the context is similar - it is the issue of dispensing or doling out a thing to others.

As a result, in the Early Modern English of the KJV, the same word "dividing" was used as a translation for two different words in the original language (the Greek) of both those passages.

Though the words in the original language differed, the intended sense or meaning, had been the same in both passages, being that the context of both - giving, dispensing, or doling out a thing to others - is the same.

When things like all the above, run smack into the "what makes sense to me" of far too many, such have problems with it.

Due to their ignorance of these kinds of principles.

And due their arriving at their own "makes sense to me" based ideas, given their ignorance of these kinds of principles.

The over reliance on the ever endless books "about" by men, that I am ever giving, say, IP, a hard time about, is in light of my awareness of the above kinds of issues.

A lot of your posts on THIS THREAD, shasta, and Nang's and Lon's on THIS THREAD also, are sound.

Not surprisingly; in their conclusions having been based on their having obviously followed the above kinds of principles, whether consciously aware of such principles, or not.

My only caution was that we cannot use the presence or absence of the definite article to define when the word "pneuma" should be translated as (the Holy) Spirit, (the human) spirit or (a demonic) spirit. It is also a misuse of the same principle when JWs say "the word was a God." When it comes to words like God and Spirit you do not need an article. The definite article was not required even in some instances where we might include it. What I said was not my idea. It came from linguists who know more than I do. I was certainly not trying to come up with a NEW dogmatic rule on the subject.

I always feel uncomfortable when I use the grammar or the meaning of a word to serve my own purposes unless the usage is established by some respected source. Bullinger obviously made a dogmatic rule where none existed in order to support his doctrine. I do not want to do the same thing. I too could be wrong in what I say and have been on many occasions. I probably will be again and I hope other will be patient when it happens.

 

[Shasta]

=way 2 go;4978455]spiritual & physical death came because of sin the tree would have prevented physical death

Agreed

heritage.
Rom_5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin

heritage - physically and genetically?

The answer is sinful flesh
1Co_15:50 I tell you this, brothers: flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God

and an alive spirit
Rom_7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.

we are born spiritually alive . (not with the Holy Spirit unless your John the baptist )
Rom 9:11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad

:think:
Enoch & Elijah

[/QUOTE]

No one is "spiritually alive" unless they have been born of the Spirit of Life (1 Corinthians 6:17) Jesus was conceived by the Holy Spirit and so He was one with God from conception but no one else is conceived that way. That is why he never sinned - because of the unique way He was begotten and how God lived continually in and through Him.

My practical experience with children has taught me that they are self-centered and ruled by the "desires or the flesh and mind." Those are not "fruit of the spirit" nor are they characteristics of the "mind of Christ" Being ruled by the desires of the flesh and mind is characteristic signs of the carnal mind. Now children are not accountable for their actions because they lack moral conscience so they are not under the law of sin and death However, neither are they spiritually alive in the same way a person who is born again is alive.

The new birth is received on the basis of a person's choice to trust in Christ not involuntarily, because we are in a state of innocence. "The first Adam was a Living Soul but the Last was a life-giving Spirit" (1 Corinthians 15:45) After the fall the First Adam became corruptible and mortal. He was not "a life-giving spirit" who could pass on spiritual life to his children.

 

[Shasta]

I never said that! Since you have no intelligent answer to what I said you just set up a straw man which you can knock over!

You are claiming that Children are not merely innocent but spiritually alive. The Bible says this:

45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being;” the last Adam a life-giving spirit.
(1 Corinthians 15:45)

Since he was not a life-giving Spirit he could not have transmitted Spiritual life to any of his descendants (1 Corinthians 15:45) Jesus, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit had God as His father and through union with Him was able to live a perfect and sinless life. By contrast children are ruled by the "desires of the flesh and mind," which are characteristics of the carnal mind (Ephesians 2:3). They are innocent, it is true. My point is that they do not naturally express the fruit of the Spirit which they naturally would if the Spirit were indwelling their spirits and directing them. Instead, we adults have to train them not to behave selfishly, to control their appetites and desires.

On the other hand "he that is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Corinthians 6:17). The one who yields their members to the Spirit bears the fruit resembling the image of Christ. When we exhibit carnal traits we are acting according to our birthright in the flesh. Although children are not dead in the sense they are not subject to the law of sin and death that is only because they are not culpable. It is not because the Spirit of God is working through them producing the image of Christ.

What I said was valid. The mentality of a child is not what is meant by being "spiritually minded" yet if they are "spiritually alive" that is exactly what you would expect. The desirable qualities children possess according to the Bible include their self honesty and simplicity of their faith. Although children are not wicked they certainly are not exemplars for our behavior, which is why when someone says you are being "childish" it is not a compliment.

 

[Danoh]

I do appreciate what God has given me, but I don't claim the fruit of the Spirit as my own. My love would never be as good as God's. My long-suffering would never be good enough. Those things don't come from my spirit. They are the result of the Holy Spirit's working in my life.



Oh, we can do acts of love, but without the love of God being shed abroad on our heart BY the Holy Spirit, those acts of love would merely be selfish acts of the flesh. And, you should ditch the zombie analogy, it's over-used and doesn't have a thing to do with who it is that produces the Fruit OF THE SPIRIT in us.



I'm not in the flesh, nor do I sin in the flesh, my little turtle dove, but I'll let you go on preaching if you're so inclined. You're going to have to do a better job, though, if you expect me to accept what you're saying.

Romans 8:9-10 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.​

Talk about appearing to be tooting one's own horn - man o man are you ever clueless of your duplicity.

And yet, here are, deluding yourself you know something about Romans 5.

You're obviously too far gone in your hypocrisy to see the obvious.

But it is what forever draws your kind to one another.

I think I'll leave you to that.

Get well soon.

Rom. 5:8

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Talk about appearing to be tooting one's own horn - man o man are you ever clueless of your duplicity.

And yet, here are, deluding yourself you know something about Romans 5.

You're obviously too far gone in your hypocrisy to see the obvious.

But it is what forever draws your kind to one another.

I think I'll leave you to that.

Get well soon.

Rom. 5:8

I've been watching and have seen [MENTION=15326]intojoy[/MENTION] attacking [MENTION=13955]glorydaz[/MENTION] and you as well. Danoh... you teach a type of flesh expectation and exaltation just like others that are derailing this thread.

This statement is so far skewed from reality on your part, I'm pointing it out.

- EE

 

[Danoh]

I've been watching and have seen [MENTION=15326]intojoy[/MENTION] attacking [MENTION=13955]glorydaz[/MENTION] and you as well. Danoh... you teach a type of flesh expectation and exaltation just like others that are derailing this thread.

This statement is so far skewed from reality on your part, I'm pointing it out.

- EE

You are wrong. Sorry you feel that way.

Rom. 5:8

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

You are wrong. Sorry you feel that way.

Rom. 5:8

I hope so. If I'm wrong... I'm wrong, but I have suspicions. The verse you quoted is beautiful. You may have missed it, but an earlier poster was trying to convince GD that the "Spirit" within us is our "spirit". Thus... making room for self exaltation. Bottom line... GD isn't self righteous or tooting their own horn.

- EE

 

[Evil.Eye.<(I)>]

Humble thy self woman


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

Please quit trolling the thread.

 

[Tambora]

Talk about appearing to be tooting one's own horn - man o man are you ever clueless of your duplicity.

And yet, here are, deluding yourself you know something about Romans 5.

You're obviously too far gone in your hypocrisy to see the obvious.

But it is what forever draws your kind to one another.

I think I'll leave you to that.

Get well soon.

Rom. 5:8

You are wrong. Sorry you feel that way.

 

[Danoh]

I hope so. If I'm wrong... I'm wrong, but I have suspicions. The verse you quoted is beautiful. You may have missed it, but an earlier poster was trying to convince GD that the "Spirit" within us is our "spirit". Thus... making room for self exaltation. Bottom line... GD isn't self righteous or tooting their own horn.

- EE

I said talk about appearing to be tooting one's own horn.

You might have asked why I'd highlighted that.

I'd highlighted my words there not as an accusation that she was boasting, rather, in an attempt to point out to her, her consistent double-standard in her ever accusing me of tooting my own horn whenever I post a similar post.

The irony of all this being that there is no resolving said obvious duplicity and this, on, of all things; a thread having to do with whether or not there is such a thing as original sin.

It is what it is. As the Apostle Paul had noted...

Some people - even though they might delight in the Lord after the inward man between themselves and the Lord - at the same time such end up oblivious to the double-standard they live by, in both their perception of, and their dealings with, others they have concluded not of their number.

And such tend to be drawn to their own kind in that kind of thing.

Personally, I find it all a fascinating dynamic to observe.

One can learn alot about what to avoid, and how to, by observing such discrepancies in others, as well as in oneself.

Anyway, take that how you will.

Yours in Him,

Rom. 5:8

 

[Danoh]

You are wrong. Sorry you feel that way.

You sure can be repeatedly dense :chuckle:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You are claiming that Children are not merely innocent but spiritually alive. The Bible says this:

45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being;” the last Adam a life-giving spirit.
(1 Corinthians 15:45)

Since he was not a life-giving Spirit he could not have transmitted Spiritual life to any of his descendants (1 Corinthians 15:45) Jesus, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit had God as His father and through union with Him was able to live a perfect and sinless life.

All of Adam's descendants are born of the Spirit when they are conceived. You refuse to deal on an intellectual level with what Paul said at Titus 3:5 about this fact. You just assert that the meaning of the Greek word translated "regeneration" is in error.

Since you refuse to deal with the meaning of Titus 3:5 let us see if you can understand what this verse is saying:

"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" (Ro.5:12).​

The "death" spoken of in "bold" is referring to "spiritual" death. So a man dies spiritually when he sins. That means that before he sins he is spiritually alive. No one emerges from the womb spiritually dead because all men are spiritually alive before they sin and die spiritually.

If you think that I have made an error about what I said here then tell me exactly what I said that is in error.

 

[Shasta]

I do appreciate what God has given me, but I don't claim the fruit of the Spirit as my own. My love would never be as good as God's. My long-suffering would never be good enough. Those things don't come from my spirit. They are the result of the Holy Spirit's working in my life.



Oh, we can do acts of love, but without the love of God being shed abroad on our heart BY the Holy Spirit, those acts of love would merely be selfish acts of the flesh. And, you should ditch the zombie analogy, it's over-used and doesn't have a thing to do with who it is that produces the Fruit OF THE SPIRIT in us.



I'm not in the flesh, nor do I sin in the flesh, my little turtle dove, but I'll let you go on preaching if you're so inclined. You're going to have to do a better job, though, if you expect me to accept what you're saying.

Romans 8:9-10 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.​

You do realize that the measure of what is and is not sin is the Image of Christ. He alone obeyed completely continuously and perfectly expressed the divine nature. By claiming to be without any sin you are claiming to be exactly like Jesus. It is also a denial of scriptures like 1 John 1:8. The Gnostics used to say they had no sin too.

 

[Shasta]

All of Adam's descendants are born of the Spirit when they are conceived. You refuse to deal on an intellectual level with what Paul said at Titus 3:5 about this fact. You just assert that the meaning of the Greek word translated "regeneration" is in error.

Since you refuse to deal with the meaning of Titus 3:5 let us see if you can understand what this verse is saying:

"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"[/I] (Ro.5:12).[/INDENT]

The "death" spoken of in "bold" is referring to "spiritual" death. So a man dies spiritually when he sins. That means that before he sins he is spiritually alive. No one emerges from the womb spiritually dead because all men are spiritually alive before they sin and die spiritually.

If you think that I have made an error about what I said here then tell me exactly what I said that is in error.

After the Fall Adam could not pass on spiritual life to His descendants. He was not a life-giving spirit but a "living soul" and could only pass on the life of the soul and body - psychological and physical life. (1 Corinthians 15:45)Jesus said flesh (biological life) gives rise only to biological life not spiritual life. That is why an entirely new spiritual birth was needed.

…5 Jesus answered “Truly, truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water (natural birth) and the Spirit. 6 Flesh is born of flesh, but spirit is born of the Spirit. 7 Do not be amazed that I said, ‘You must be born again.’…(John 3:6)

If each individual is born with spiritual life then we are all born in a pre-fall state and each of us needs to fall separately. If this were so then some people could choose to remain in a spiritual state. These people could, if they so chose, continue to live a perfect and sinless life. In fact, since these special people are already alive spiritually there would be no need for them to be "born again." They would be like Jesus who was conceived by the Holy Spirit and had God as His Father. Do you know anyone else like this? If there were anyone like this they would not need a savior.

5 He saved us, not by the righteous deeds we had done, but according to His mercy, through the washing of new birth and renewal by the Holy Spirit. (Titus 3:5 Berean Study Bible)

This is talking about the the new birth. Thayer says:

the word denotes the restoration of a thing to its pristine state, its renovation,

The "pristine state" of the soul would not be how we were in childhood but to the state we were in when God first made the soul. I have tried to point before that God does not want us to be like we were as children. Children have a simplicity of faith but they are also self-centered and ruled by the desires of their flesh and mind (which is a characteristic of the carnal mind). This internal disposition makes it necessary for us to train and discipline them externally. I assure you children will not behave like civilized human beings if you allow them follow their natural impulses. Just because they are not culpable does not mean that their actions and attitudes naturally express the image of God. Is this the template you imagine God wants to restore us to?

 

[God's Truth]

I am just saying the word "spirit" cannot be defined on the basis of the presence or absence of the definite article. I agree with your assessment about the meaning when it comes to the battle between our old and new natures.

We are only flesh and spirit.

Our new natures are just more power and perfection in the spirit we always had.

 

[God's Truth]

I hope so. If I'm wrong... I'm wrong, but I have suspicions. The verse you quoted is beautiful. You may have missed it, but an earlier poster was trying to convince GD that the "Spirit" within us is our "spirit". Thus... making room for self exaltation. Bottom line... GD isn't self righteous or tooting their own horn.

- EE

We have our own spirit, and when we are saved we receive the Holy Spirit to live with our spirit.

By the way, why do you think you can exalt people who insult others? Do you think we can defend ourselves from people who slander us?
Just because you are trying to bond with another member and exalt yourselves, it does not mean what you say about them is true.

 

[God's Truth]

What is wrong with some of the people here?

We have some who want to constantly tell us we are deceivers, and children of the devil, but if we defend ourselves and put down the false accuser---we have EE coming to their rescue.

 

[Tambora]

You are claiming that Children are not merely innocent but spiritually alive. The Bible says this:

45 So it is written: “The first man Adam became a living being;” the last Adam a life-giving spirit.
(1 Corinthians 15:45)

I have to ask if you think GOD ever gave Adam His Spirit. Cause here is the scripture Paul is referring to:


Genesis 2:7 KJV
(7) And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.


Adam had to be spiritually alive at some point for him to be able to spiritually die.
Do you see the above scripture as the time Adam became 'spiritually' alive, or is that some other type of 'life'?
And if that is not when Adam became 'spiritually' alive, then when did he?

Thanks.