The concept of the original sin

[OneLight]

40 minutes ago, PeterR said:

 

(I will refer to the part which I believe relates to my questions.)

 

Legalizing abortion, legalizing same-sex marriage, legalizing transgenderism, introducing the concept of intellectual theft and many other depravations by governments ...
And for about a year the government also forbids to love our relatives as ourselves and even suggests to persecute enemies.

Isn't all this just a fallen human point of view?

 

1Ti 1:9-11  Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 
For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; 
According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

 

I find it interesting that you quoted my question to another member about a specific incident, but choose to answer your questions.  That said, I will try to address your post as written in respect to you.

The first three legal issue you present are in direct violation to God and His word, so I see no issue with not following them by following God instead.  Intellectual theft is in agreement with Gods ways as one of the 10 commandments is "You shall not steal.".  I don't see how you could disagree with this law.

As for we being forbidden to love our relative as ourselves, show me the law you speak of.

Then you go on and quote 1 Timothy 1:9-11 as if we, being Christians, are allowed to commit such sins, as we are not under the law.  It seems to me that you are saying that being saved gives us a free pass to sin as we are under grace.  I firmly disagree with that, if this is what you meant by posting that piece of scripture in this post. 

When Jesus was asked what the greatest commandment is we can find His answer in Matthew 22:34-40.  Here is the question and His answer.

But when the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together.  Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?”

Jesus said to him, “‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’  This is the first and great commandment.  And the second is like it: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’  On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.”

Just by following Jesus and His ways, we would be following these two commandments with all our being.  Notice that Jesus states that by doing so, we would be, by default, following all the laws and Prophets, not excluding them.

What was it that Paul said about the law and sin?  Romans 6:15-16

What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not!  Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?

Sin is sin and we should be doing our best not to sin, not excusing ourselves if we sin with the umbrella statement that we are not under the law but under grace.

 

Now, can I ask you why you decided to insert your questions in a specific discussion I was having with Peterlag?  Were you doing so to support his stance on how he see no wrong in plagiarism or was there another reason?

 

 

Edited April 7, 2021 by OneLight
clarification corrections

[PeterR]

8 hours ago, Waggles said:

1Timothy 1:

6 Certain persons by swerving from these have wandered away into vain discussion, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions.

I understand here that Paul is referring to the Law of Moses not Roman laws. 

I'm afraid you are wrong.

G3547
νομοδιδάσκαλος
nomodidaskalos
nom-od-id-as'-kal-os
From G3551 and G1320; an expounder of the (Jewish) law, that is, a Rabbi: - doctor (teacher) of the law.
Total KJV occurrences: 3

Also: Luk_5:17; Act_5:34

 

Quote

 

"1 Timothy 1:8

If a man use it lawfully. ‘We know,’ the apostle seems to say, ‘we who have been taught, through personal experience, by the Spirit of God, what is the nature and office of the law, that it is good and noble. To use it law-fully is to feel that it no longer touches us, that we are not under its condemnation, to press its observance not on those who are “just” as having the new life in Christ, but on those who still live in sin. That, with perhaps a slight play upon the word, is the legitimate use of law.’"

 

(A Popular Commentary on the New Testament)

Edited April 7, 2021 by PeterR

[PeterR]

You see, @OneLight, I never said that whoever is saved has a pass to sin, nor do I say that he should judge the law. I say that whoever is saved, the law that is given to sinners does not apply to him. Therefore, I was surprised when "passing by" I noticed that brother @Peterlag, who by God's will has a higher knowledge (and seems willing to preach the Gospel) and gives his testimony as a truly free follower of Christ, was judged by his fellows according to the law given to sinners. Of course, I stand here on the side of freedom and proclaim it (because such were probably the intentions of the founder of this topic), even if it were in any way, but Christ would be proclaimed. Even if it was "sacrilege" for someone.

 

1Ti 1:9-11  Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 
For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; 
According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.

 

So I will repeat once again that it will be a sin for a once saved to turn away from the gift of grace and return to obeying any law given to sinners, and especially a spiritual return to the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

 

As one brother in Lord said:

Quote

There are times in life when a person makes a balance. I mean the spiritual balance, called the examination of conscience. Some come to the conclusion that they are good people. They can, for example, play the role of the so-called "moral authorities". Others confess their sin to themselves and then to God. There is an act of contrition. Man recognizes his misery and asks for forgiveness in the Name and through Jesus' sacrifice. But ... Will it help? What actually changed after the Savior's death? Well, everything. Everything without the rest. And most of all - the Law. Next to the Law of Moses, the Law of Faith emerged. And although the second is not unrelated to the first - they cannot be compared. This is a completely different reality regarding the New Order. Anyone who appeals to Moses; or conscience from under the tree of Knowledge - belongs to the earthly people. Anyone found in the Law of Faith belongs to the heavenly ones.

There is also a growing group in the new law, "pouring new wine (the Law of Faith) into old, useless wineskins (the Law of Moses)."
And again, like a boomerang, the question of choice returns. How is it? Why is it written that the elect will come into life? After all, Jesus died for everyone!
Salvation History appears as a series of Covenants in which God revealed more and more to mankind. As if hoping that a person would recognize his condition and humbly return to the Creator. Salvation History is also proof that nothing like that happened, is not happening, and that it will not happen. Raising to a higher level - did not bring the desired effect. Even people brought up on the Gospel - return to their own righteousness. They push themselves to the Court. Therefore the choice and help of the Lord must be kept to the end.

[...]

 

1Co 2:15  But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.

 

Edited April 7, 2021 by PeterR

[enoob57]

11 minutes ago, PeterR said:

So I will repeat once again that it will be a sin for a once saved to turn away from the gift of grace and return to obeying any law given to sinners, and especially a spiritual return to the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

to pit the law of God against the love of God is a foolish venture... 

Matt 22:37-40

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
KJV

[PeterR]

7 minutes ago, enoob57 said:

to pit the law of God against the love of God is a foolish venture... 

Matt 22:37-40

37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

38 This is the first and great commandment.

39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
KJV

Mar 12:34  And when Jesus saw that he answered discreetly, he said unto him, Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. And no man after that durst ask him any question.

[enoob57]

The whole council of God is needed to address any topic and to pick out one without the whole is error!

[PeterR]

A Popular Commentary on the New Testament - Phillip Schaff

 

"THIRD ASSAULT. See notes on Mat_22:34-40. Luke (Luk_20:39) merely hints at this.

Mark 12:34
Discreetly. Understandingly, intelligently, wisely; more than ‘discreetly,’ in the more modem sense.
Thou art not far from the kingdom of God. Intellectually on the right road, nearer to the kingdom than a mere formalist could be, recognizing the spirituality of the law, perhaps conscious of the folly of self-righteousness; but, though standing as it were at the door, still outside.—Alexander. While the worst of His opponents were unable to convict Him of an error, or betray Him into a mistake, the best of them, when brought into direct communication with Him on the most important subjects, found themselves almost in the position of His own disciples.
And no man any more durst ask him any question. A natural effect of the previous experiments. No further question is put to Him, but He asks one which they cannot answer. Matthew however, gives more prominence to the fact that no one ‘was able to answer Him a word,’ and so puts this statement after the victorious question of our Lord. Such independent testimony is the most valuable, especially here where our Lord asks a question respecting His own Person, in some respects the central question of Christianity."

[Justin Adams]

Has anyone actually answered the OP.  THE original sin. What was it and who committed it?

[David1701]

On 4/6/2021 at 11:30 AM, Justin Adams said:

To answer the OP with a question. Has anyone considered the impacts of Gen 6 and the proliferation of self destructive behavior that this incursion precipitated?

Why was the law given? To counteract transgressions! Namely, the transgression of the 'angels that sinned'.  There is a good scholarly peer-reviewed paper on this possibility.

The law was not given to counteract transgressions, but to give knowledge of them (amongst other things, like accountability).  Far from counteracting transgressions, the law stirs them up and reveals the presence of hidden sins.

Rom. 3:19,20 (EMTV)

 19 Now we know that as many things as the law says, it speaks to those under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be held accountable to God.
  20 Therefore by works of the law no flesh shall be justified in His sight, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

Rom. 7:5,6 (EMTV)

5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions aroused through the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death.
  6 But now we were released from the law, having died in that to which we were held fast, so that we should serve as slaves in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.

[OneLight]

23 hours ago, OneLight said:

On 4/6/2021 at 9:21 AM, PeterR said:

On 4/5/2021 at 2:07 PM, OneLight said:

When you make it sound like you are the author of someone else's work, that is called plagiarism, which is against the law.  Copy and pasting word for word is not clearing anything up, and not giving credit to the original writer is like stealing.  You have even claimed in another thread you created that the site belongs to you and that Stephen is your work.  Which is it?  Did you personally write Stephen and is the site yours or are you stealing the work of another, changing a word or two, and calling it yours?

Remember, you have to be honest because you say you do not sin ...

Do you want a free servant of God to be enslaved by some law?
Does he sin? No, he isn't.

Since he doesn't live in the old Law, his sin cannot be defined.

The Lord's disciple would fall into sin again if he departed from the path of Faith (it would be a sin to return to the Commandments, and thus to appeal to one's righteousness and fall out of grace. Gal 3:1-14)

Your reply is not an answer, but another dodge.  Your teachings are a danger to anyone trying to follow scripture.  Jesus, when questioned about a law in those times about paying taxes, said to “Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.”  Jesus Himself would not break the law.  Are you greater than Jesus?

Paul in Romans 13:1-2 also stated "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.  Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves."

So to answer your fist question, Yes, we are to obey the law.  For you to teach otherwise is to teach another way, not His way. 

I'm still waiting for your answer to my questions. 

Then let's go back to when you answered my post directed at Peterlag and perhaps you can clarify and give a deeper response to my questions to him.

In a nutshell, it appears Peterlag has been using someone else's work and has openly claimed it was his work.  By claiming he wrote something he did not, would that not be lying?  Is lying a sin to even a born again Christian or can a Christina lie and get away with it by claiming they are not, as you put it, "enslaved by some law"?  Please explain how he has not sinned since you said "Does he sin? No, he isn't.".

Edited April 7, 2021 by OneLight