Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,213
Members1,325
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
9 registered members (dedication, daylily, TheophilusOne, Daryl, Karen Y, 4 invisible),
2,493
guests, and 5
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45088
05/05/02 04:48 PM
05/05/02 04:48 PM
|
OP
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Amen. So what ever other definitions of sin given in the Bible, the one that most fully represents the truth is 1 John 3:4. That's not to say that the others are wrong (Rom 14:23, Jam 4:17 and 1 John 5:17) it's just that they are based on 1 John 3:4. But what about the idea that sin is two things - 1) SIN singular (a state of being), and 2) sin plural (a state of doing)?
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45089
05/05/02 05:11 PM
05/05/02 05:11 PM
|
OP
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Pastor Ikan, have you read those Ellen White quotes where she essentially says the Sabbath did not exist as a commandment before Jesus created it on the 7th day? I suspect this is also true of the 5th and 7th commanments (which were not possible before the creation of mankind). What do you think? The Spirit of Prophecy Volume One, page 261 "The law of God existed before man was created. The angels were governed by it. Satan fell because he transgressed the principles of God's government. After Adam and Eve were created, God made known to them his law. It was not then written, but was rehearsed to them by Jehovah. "The Sabbath of the fourth commandment was instituted in Eden. After God had made the world, and created man upon the earth, he made the Sabbath for man. After Adam's sin and fall, nothing was taken from the law of God. The principles of the ten commandments existed before the fall, and were of a character suited to the condition of a holy order of beings. After the fall, the principles of those precepts were not changed, but additional precepts were given to meet man in his fallen state." S.D.A. Bible Commentary Vol. 1, page 1104, paragraph 5 "The law of God existed before the creation of man or else Adam could not have sinned. After the transgression of Adam the principles of the law were not changed, but were definitely arranged and expressed to meet man in his fallen condition."
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45090
05/11/02 09:20 PM
05/11/02 09:20 PM
|
|
In the above posts, there is a major problem with translation. Yes, the KJV says "sin is the transgression of the law," but that is not what the Greek says. It is a mistranslation of the Greek that has caused a lot of misunderstanding in Christianity in general and Adventism in particular. The Greek and all modern translations say "sin is lawlessness." Lawlessness is an attitude, not an activity as the word "transgression" implies. Thus the basic definition of sin is an attitude, specifically an attitude of rebellion against God. It is obvious, however, that the word "sin" is also used in much of scripture as the unlawful deeds that we do, so the differentiation which Mike was making is probably correct except that the capitalization and pluralization is not supplied. It must be deduced from the context. Bob Lee
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45091
05/13/02 03:22 PM
05/13/02 03:22 PM
|
OP
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Bob, welcome back. In the last year and a half we have had the privilege of reading your posts only 5 times. I hope we hear from you more often. Yes, lawlessness certainly says it all, doesn't it! It's an all emcompassing condition begining with the root of sin (attitude) and producing the fruits of sin (thoughts, words and deeds). Thank you for sharing those insights.
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45092
06/05/02 12:01 PM
06/05/02 12:01 PM
|
Charter Member Active Member 2012
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,157
Jakarta, Indonesia
|
|
Quote. The Bible and the SOP clearly teach that sin is the transgression of the law. Sin is not a state of being. It's not who or what we are. Sin is any thought, word or deed that violates the law of God. All other definitions are manmade and must lead to sin. Uquote.
Mike.
SIN (singular) is indeed a transgression of the law. Men’s sinful nature that was based on their “love for self” is against the principle of the law “love that seeks no self.”
And since ‘self-love” is our nature, we were already under condemnation of the law even though we keep the law perfectly without breaking the letter, because what we break is the spirit of the law.
Can a man change his nature? Can an Ethiopian change the color of his skin? Can a leopard change the dots of his skin? Nope! So, how can you do good if the nature is evil?
That is the reason Christ must come to die for men, not only to redeem them from this SIN they never committed and the death they are not responsible for, but also to release men from the power of SIN (through His Spirit), just then can a man have a change of nature, a change of character that fits the principle of the law which is the principle of heaven it self.
In His love
James S.
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45093
06/05/02 12:11 PM
06/05/02 12:11 PM
|
|
And the result of this "change of nature, a change of character that fits the principle of the law which is the principle of heaven it self" is in keeping "the commandments of God" because the law is now not only written on tablets of stone, but is especially and more importantly now written in the heart. [ June 05, 2002, 10:12 AM: Message edited by: Daryl Fawcett ]
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45094
06/05/02 01:50 PM
06/05/02 01:50 PM
|
|
There has been a "decalogue" from the beginning of time...it just doesn't read like the Ten commandments written on the 2 tables of stone. God's Character was revealed in person to all the inhabitants of heaven. But....
There was war in heaven, remember....Satan broke the "laws of heaven". His heart was lifted up and self was the God of his life....then he lied to the Angels and finaly all were cast out of heaven. God's character was brought under a challenge and the accusers had to be cast out.
Now here is Satan in the garden and again he is bringing doubt upon the goodness of God's character and again he lies about God and His teachings...The laws of Eden..Eve was decieved, commited sin...."sin is breaking a law of God"....no matter where in time of our History, there has always been God's laws, Those pertaining to us now were written down at Sinai, but they existed from the beginning.... and the rest is very well known to us.
Did we in herit sin "original sin" no, that is the catholic doctrine, and the reason why they baptize babies. Did we inherit a natural tendency to sin and sinful flesh from Adam that is subject to the first death? Yes, but the second death, eternal destruction, no, that is a choice.
When we understand what right is from wrong, good from evil, sin from sinless, we make informed choices. We are guilty of the choices we make and pay the consequences of our choices. If we are to spend eternity with our Redeemer Saviour...we will choose to be with him and sooperated with Him in all His plans for us. We surrender our will to His will and He will save us. This is the most important choice we have to make. We work to this end, seek, strive, resist the Devil and He will flee from us.
To Sin or not to sin.....if we know the difference we will make the desired choice.
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45095
06/05/02 03:37 PM
06/05/02 03:37 PM
|
OP
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Amen. The "SIN vs. sin" concept confuses the truth about sin. The idea that we possess SIN in the form of fallen nature condemns us by default, a Catholic abberation of the truth.
We are not guilty of sin until we commit a sin. And furthermore we are not held accountable for the sins we commit unwittingly. Although Jesus paid the penalty for sins committed unwittingly, which is why we are not held accountable for them.
Sinful flesh cannot commit a sin. It can only communicate sinful suggestions, in the form of unholy thoughts and feelings. But these are not a sin, they are only temptations. [ June 05, 2002, 01:39 PM: Message edited by: Mike Lowe ]
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45096
06/12/02 12:54 PM
06/12/02 12:54 PM
|
|
And the result of this "change of nature, a change of character that fits the principle of the law which is the principle of heaven it self" is in keeping "the commandments of God" because the law is now not only written on tablets of stone, but is especially and more importantly now written in the heart.
[ June 05, 2002, 10:12 AM: Message edited by: Daryl Fawcett ]
___________________ In His Love, Mercy & Grace
Daryl
= = = = =
A classic concept that I believe is not according to the gospel of Christ.
Love is a character and not a law that could judge and condemn men, because love is not a written law that have authority upon men to judge and condemn them. Remember what the Scripture said: “When there is no law there is no transgression.”
The Ten Commandments was a written law that has authority upon men to judge and condemn those who break it.
The Scripture said that “the law kills”, the “Ten Commandments engraved on stone tablets kill because it lead to condemnation and death.”
On the contrary, love gives life. Love is fruit of the Spirit, fruit of a believer who were led by the Spirit. The Scripture said that “the ministry of the Spirit lead to righteousness and brings life.”
So, how could a law that once engraved on stone tablets, which lead to condemnation and death be implanted in our heart. If it leads to condemnation and death when written on a stone tablet, the more it will be when it is written in our heart.
What is written in our heart is LOVE, a character imparted by the Spirit when a believer is led by the Spirit. And LOVE is not the Ten Commandments, there is a BIG gap and difference between them.
In His love
James S.
|
|
|
Re: SIN (singular) and sins (plural) - Hogwash or Whitewash?
#45097
06/12/02 12:56 PM
06/12/02 12:56 PM
|
|
Mike Lowe posted June 05, 2002 01:37 PM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Amen. The "SIN vs. sin" concept confuses the truth about sin. The idea that we possess SIN in the form of fallen nature condemns us by default, a Catholic abberation of the truth.
We are not guilty of sin until we commit a sin. And furthermore we are not held accountable for the sins we commit unwittingly. Although Jesus paid the penalty for sins committed unwittingly, which is why we are not held accountable for them.
Sinful flesh cannot commit a sin. It can only communicate sinful suggestions, in the form of unholy thoughts and feelings. But these are not a sin, they are only temptations.
Unquote.
Mike.
What does this verse means to you?
“Because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God?”
Why did Christ come and die for us? To redeem the sins we committed? Then the whole world might enter heaven and live in heaven!
Once under the law, no matter you break a law willfully or unwittingly, you will be condemned by the law.
Christ came to redeem men from the wages of SIN, a death they didn’t deserve, because they were born in SIN, a SIN they never committed.
Christ also came to redeem those who were under the law from the curse of the law. But those who were not under the law because they has not the law, were not redeemed from the curse of the law but from the SIN they were born with. They were justified by Christ righteousness, but condemnation and death came through Adam.
Sinful flesh can not commit a sin, but men were under the dominion of their sinful flesh. They are dominated by the SIN in their flesh that sends sinful suggestion called the desire of the flesh. This condition make a man can do nothing good (Read Romans 7:14-23).
In His love
James S.
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|