For my Brothers and Sisters in the Lord Jesus Christ

Terrence

Well-Known Member
Messages
231
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hey Family,

I have a question to ask you guys. What do you think it means to be "dead in sin?"

Thanks,

Terrence
 
To me:

Sin is the death of the soul. There is none of the spiritual life present while in sin. They are destitue of the principles and powers of spiritual life; and cut off from God who is the fountain of life.

They are physically alive but cut off from God and spiritual life just like Adam died the moment he ate the fruit.
 
Dor said:
They are physically alive but cut off from God and spiritual life just like Adam died the moment he ate the fruit.
Interesting. Consider the following scriptures, I'd like to ask another question:

1. All who sin is a slave to sin. - John 8:34

2. The flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to the law of God, nor is it able to do so. Romans 8:6

3. A natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Here's my question. Since the natural man sins, making him a "slave to sin" as Jesus said in John 8:34, and since he being natural, cannot even understand the things of God as 1 Cor. 2:14 says, and since he cannot submit to God's laws as Rom. 8:6 says, how can he choose to obey the gospel by repenting and trusting in Jesus? In other words, how do we tell a person who is "dead in sins" to repent and believe the gospel, when he cannot even submit to that commandment, understand the truth of the words, and is a slave to sins?
 
Understanding our fallen human nature is the key.

When Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden and was given by God the commandment not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil lest, by giving that commandment God gave man the free will to choose: either life or death. It is important to remember the other tree mentioned in the Garden: the Tree of Life. I don't think that by merely abstaining from the Trre of Knowledge that man would have the ability to resist indefinitely. The freewill of man in that neutral state, as it were, would inevidably lead to a choice between Trees. I believe that had they ate of the Tree of Life first, then that would have been synomomous with choosing the Spirit of God and therefore they would have lived forever in perfection. But being as it may, they ended up choosing the wrong tree (which really amounted to choosing to disobey God and thus sinning) and like a virused computer, they crashed.

Because they sinned and fell, the human nature changed, and therefore, lest man eat of the Tree of Life in that condition and live eternally in his fallen state, God banished man from the Garden....until God could redeem Man from sin. That was the purpose of Christ, to free us from the stain and sting of sin and death. By His righteousness, we are made whole and new and therefore can be vessel of His Spirit (Tree of Life). God has to make new wineskins for the new wine.

Natural man cannot received the things of God, for he doesn't have the Spirit of God and cannot have the Spirit of God until Christ can cleanse him of his sin. But whom the Son make free is free indeed.

I don't believe that because we are in the natural (fallen) state that precludes us from the ability to choose. But by ourselves, we cannot through mere obedience attain that pre-fallen state. That is why the law produces death, for we cannot obey it in and of ourselves. But when we recognize the hopeless dilemma we are in and turn to God for help, then God by His grace enacts salvation through Jesus Christ in our lives and makes us new creatures. THEN will He pour His Spirit out upon us.

We might be dead in our sins, but like a drowning man who is thrown a life preserver, we have the choice to grab on and be pulled back in.
 
Terrence said:
Interesting. Consider the following scriptures, I'd like to ask another question:

1. All who sin is a slave to sin. - John 8:34

2. The flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to the law of God, nor is it able to do so. Romans 8:6

3. A natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised" (1 Corinthians 2:14).

Here's my question. Since the natural man sins, making him a "slave to sin" as Jesus said in John 8:34, and since he being natural, cannot even understand the things of God as 1 Cor. 2:14 says, and since he cannot submit to God's laws as Rom. 8:6 says, how can he choose to obey the gospel by repenting and trusting in Jesus? In other words, how do we tell a person who is "dead in sins" to repent and believe the gospel, when he cannot even submit to that commandment, understand the truth of the words, and is a slave to sins?

We can not tell them anything. All we can do is show them by using the law that they are sinners but that only goes so far.
Christ calls those who come to him.

Joh 10:3To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
 
to be dead in sin, is not being renewed, reborn, and forgiven by the grace of god--jesus christ.
unforgiven by the saviour is spiritually dead in sin. there is no life but in he that is life.
 
Dondi said:
Understanding our fallen human nature is the key.

When Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden and was given by God the commandment not to eat of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil lest, by giving that commandment God gave man the free will to choose: either life or death. It is important to remember the other tree mentioned in the Garden: the Tree of Life. I don't think that by merely abstaining from the Trre of Knowledge that man would have the ability to resist indefinitely. The freewill of man in that neutral state, as it were, would inevidably lead to a choice between Trees. I believe that had they ate of the Tree of Life first, then that would have been synomomous with choosing the Spirit of God and therefore they would have lived forever in perfection. But being as it may, they ended up choosing the wrong tree (which really amounted to choosing to disobey God and thus sinning) and like a virused computer, they crashed.

Because they sinned and fell, the human nature changed, and therefore, lest man eat of the Tree of Life in that condition and live eternally in his fallen state, God banished man from the Garden....until God could redeem Man from sin. That was the purpose of Christ, to free us from the stain and sting of sin and death. By His righteousness, we are made whole and new and therefore can be vessel of His Spirit (Tree of Life). God has to make new wineskins for the new wine.

Natural man cannot received the things of God, for he doesn't have the Spirit of God and cannot have the Spirit of God until Christ can cleanse him of his sin. But whom the Son make free is free indeed.

I don't believe that because we are in the natural (fallen) state that precludes us from the ability to choose. But by ourselves, we cannot through mere obedience attain that pre-fallen state. That is why the law produces death, for we cannot obey it in and of ourselves. But when we recognize the hopeless dilemma we are in and turn to God for help, then God by His grace enacts salvation through Jesus Christ in our lives and makes us new creatures. THEN will He pour His Spirit out upon us.

We might be dead in our sins, but like a drowning man who is thrown a life preserver, we have the choice to grab on and be pulled back in.

Does the sinner who is drowing in sin, whether knowingly or not, love God or does He love sin? What does the scripture teach?
 
God is not an angry old man, sitting in a tree or up on a mountain somewhere, condemning us - or "judging" us (in the sense that people have apparently come to believe) ... LEAST of all insisting somehow that we simply ASK for something, then suddenly tumbling all over himself to bless us and hand us everlasting life. Fact is, God Loves us, accepts us, and pours forth his UNCONDITIONAL Blessing upon us ... no matter what we do.

Unconditional Love. This is something to meditate on. UNCONDITIONAL.

I think that word is our stumbling block. Hint: If you want to say something like "But ..." or "Sure, EXCEPT ..." - then you ain't got it yet.

UNconditional

The sun shines alike upon sinner and saint. NEITHER man has to ASK for the Sun to shine. If a sinful man, fearing the Light, hides his face from others, from God, from himself - then yes, he suffers because of his sin. But God's Love still reaches him. EVEN if he doesn't recognize it, know it, or believe it. Should God's Love cease to reach us - for a fraction of a second - we would cease to exist. THink about that.

The saint is a man who walks IN the Light, consciously, knowingly, yet humbly .... but he does not hestitate to share God's Blessing with all those he encounters. And he does NOT withhold his Love ... yet he does learn to be careful not to empower a man who walks in sin. Amplification of our vices is a disservice. Christ Jesus knew that all men have free will - and thus he did not heal in some instances, or did not violate this Law.

The sun shines unconditionally ... and this, is how God's Love is. Have you experienced it? Then surely you know - that Love is not withheld, from ANYone. Only various forms of empowerment. ANd this makes perfect sense, in God's perfect world.

sighhhh

Love and Light,

your wonderfully wretched, vile & horrible, awful & tremendously terrible brother soul - andrew (taijasi)

[C'mon people, this is stupid. A wise man knows his vices, pride & presumptuousness & what-have-you, but he also knows his virtue(s), and his strength(s). He may or may not babble on about Jesus, and God, and speak in the same language as you. Do not overlook his virtue, due to the difference(s)! How easy it is to say, "I am not my brother's keeper!" Wanna bet? ;)]

Namaskar ... :)
 
Terrence said:
Does the sinner who is drowing in sin, whether knowingly or not, love God or does He love sin? What does the scripture teach?

Sin requires knowledge of the fact, else it is not a sin.
 
Quahom1 said:
Sin requires knowledge of the fact, else it is not a sin.
Then wouldn't the missionaries spreading the Gospel be doing something counterproductive? It's like they're making people sin by giving them knowledge of their sins.

As for the natural man being a slave to sin, I think that is referring to the fact that as long as you are a part of the world (that is, natural), you will never be totally free from sin. The physical or natural body is something that needs to be overcome and tamed by the spiritual body so that it will submit itself to the will of God. That's my two cents.
 
moseslmpg said:
Then wouldn't the missionaries spreading the Gospel be doing something counterproductive? It's like they're making people sin by giving them knowledge of their sins.

As for the natural man being a slave to sin, I think that is referring to the fact that as long as you are a part of the world (that is, natural), you will never be totally free from sin. The physical or natural body is something that needs to be overcome and tamed by the spiritual body so that it will submit itself to the will of God. That's my two cents.

No. There is an "A ha!" factor. I think it is called a revelation. Before such there is no sin, but after such any continuation is...sin.
 
Hey, I'm giving the benefit of a doubt here. If one does not know, then they can't be in sin. Once they do know, and continue along certain paths, they are in continuous sin. It isn't simple. It compounds itself by proxy and ineuendo.

We all are born with original sin. However, it only works if we are aware of it...Even God would not condemn that which does not know it did wrong.
 
Oh, I see. It's just not called sin before the revelation. I assume that they are still subject to original sin though, even though they don't know about it.
 
moseslmpg said:
Oh, I see. It's just not called sin before the revelation. I assume that they are still subject to original sin though, even though they don't know about it.

Well, I didn't know about original sin, until I learned about it...:eek: Kind of like telling a child they are doomed to hell because they have not accepted Jesus, when they don't even know what sin means, let alone Jesus. I think it is called reasonablness.

As far as standard sin (is there such a thing?), how can one sin when one doesn't know one has sinned?
 
Quahom1 said:
Sin requires knowledge of the fact, else it is not a sin.

I'm not so sure about that. People are born in sin and are cursed from brith because of that sin.
 
Kindest Regards, Terrence, and welcome to CR!
Terrence said:
I'm not so sure about that. People are born in sin and are cursed from brith because of that sin.
Sorry to butt in here, but...

While we may be "born into sin," as in "born into a sinful world," we are innocent until we reach the age of accountability. For the typical person, that would be sometime around 5 years old, give or take. However, there are some people that never reach the age of accountability, such as the mentally handicapped, who are born innocent and live innocent to their dying day. Simply put, a very young child is too self-absorbed and self-centered to understand what "right and wrong" are.

Kohlberg's "stages of moral development" speak to this issue, although I am pretty sure he would be surprized to find himself referenced in this context. The earliest stage is simply too focused on self to have any moral bearing. Points of law and morality (including sin) are moot to such a one.

Now, one could argue that a person innately understands "right from wrong," (the "law written on our hearts"), but one must still be of a point of physical and mental development to understand. *If*, and I cannot stress this enough, IF a person is legitimately ignorant, they are not accountable in God's eyes. Chapter and verse escapes me, but this is an underlying theme throughout many of the writings of Paul, and not only Paul. My "go to" example is in the book of Romans, I believe it is 10:12 (might be 12:10, I forget).

Consider the example of the contrast between the 613 Levitical laws, and the 7 (?) Noachide laws. The Levitical laws were given to those who then became knowledgeable, these "chosen of G-d" now know, and because they know, they are accountable. The Noachide laws are for those who *do not* know, indeed may have not even heard the words or been exposed to the concept in any manner. In their "ignorance" they are accountable only for those "natural" moral laws that are written on their hearts by their Creator. The subtleties of something like linsey/woolsey prohibitions are beyond their understanding, but not committing murder among one's own is pretty well a "no-brainer."

I will go one step further to explain, as this has implications on the Christian baptism. (As in infant vs. "adult" baptism)

How can one "accept Christ" when one does not understand who Christ is? Indeed, when one cannot even ask in an understandable manner for their next meal, or convey that they have just pooped their pants with words, how can they receive Christ? It is not necessary (Christ understands), they are innocent. Such a child may be "dedicated" to Christ (an affirmation by the parents to raise the child in a Christian household), but the self-knowledgeable acceptance of Christ and His teachings must come from a person "of age" and understanding to make a conscious and deliberate choice. Otherwise, it is of no "genuine" effect, it is simply a rote passage, I would argue, for the social benefit of the parents, it has no bearing on the child (or their "salvation").
 
one has be to careful in using the statement "born in sin". because sin can be a broad term. there is sin such as evil, there is sin as transgression, there is sin as blasphemy, there is sin as the way we live our lives seperated from god until we are reconciled.

in this case born in sin means that because adam sinned, he lost his connection with god and became spiritually dead. that sin of being spiritually dead continues, which is gods plan, until we accept christ and are spiritually reborn.

the sin of transgressions is the curse of the law. that is fulfilled by the grace of god and the salvation of jesuschrist. out of love and grace we should act not by consequence of law.

the sin of blasphemy is the curse of losing ones soul by denying the truth that they holy spirit reveals and then you realize it but reject it anyway for whatever reasons.

the sin of evil thoughts, is like murder or hate or abuse or rape or animal cruelty, etc.
 
Quahom1 said:
As far as standard sin (is there such a thing?), how can one sin when one doesn't know one has sinned?
Well, you could kill someone and then ignore it or have it removed from your memory. I'm not sure if you're a proponent of linguistic relativism or if you actually believe there is no wrong doing without knowledge of it... If it's the latter case, then mssionaries are a scourge upon the earth, and ignorant people are allowed to stone others (let he who is without sin, etc.)

Blazn, as far as I'm concerned, sin is sin, i.e. an affront to God's will. So it doesn't matter what kind of sin it is. I think it says in the Bible, all of them are equal anyway.
 
moseslmpg said:
Blazn, as far as I'm concerned, sin is sin, i.e. an affront to God's will. So it doesn't matter what kind of sin it is. I think it says in the Bible, all of them are equal anyway.
yes sin is the all encompassing word. all sin is seperation from god and going against his will, but in the context of "born in sin", it means not born with evil thoughts, or born breaking the law, or born blaspheming as babies cannot do these things. it means we are born spiritually seperated from god until we are born again.
 
Juantoo.. you really think 5 yo is accountability??? I believe its adulthood... which in Judiasm its 13ish.. I also think it differs from person to person.. A mentally challenged person might never reach that age.. My thought is when you have a fully developed conscience..when you know right from wrong at the age of 5 you are still too impressionable.. for example a 5 yo can be sexually abused and not know its wrong.. or they could steal a candybar and not know its wrong..

Just my thoughts...
 
Back
Top