The Temptation of Jesus

[houston]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

You're Kung Fu is very good

No, it is not. If there was no sin nature then there is someone somewhere who is sinless and has no need of a savior.

[houston]

Psalm 58:3
The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by houston

Psalm 58:3
The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies

Hyperbole, because nobody speaks as soon as they are born.

As stated earlier, the universality of sin does not require a sin nature to account for it.

Now, let's play pretend for just a moment. Suppose there was somebody, other than Jesus, who never ever sinned, ever.

That would be a good thing, right? Since when did sin become good, and righteousness become bad?

But suppose this person never ever sinned. Then what? Then that person still needs to take up his cross and follow Jesus, if he would be perfect.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

we are not in the garden any more, the course of human history and nature was changed with the sin of man. You may believe that we are born in the same condition as Adam was created however this is not true.

Adam gained the knowledge of good and evil when he sinned. But what about the next generation? Did they have to eat of that same tree to gain this knowledge? No, it was inherited, we now know good and evil naturally. Were did the desire to kill Able come from? IMO it was the unrestrained jealousy and envy. The bible says that Cain was wroth "angry". Where did these feelings come from? Something has changed with nature of man, yes we were originally created innocent not even with knowledge of good and evil. But where do we get this knowledge from today?

Lets look at the condition of man if left to its on whits. We would be guilty of the works of the flesh. This is the natural direction the flesh goes if not restrained, to please flesh and to have a carnal mind. Ever noticed we restrain ourselves from doing evil and not good why is that?

Fair enough. Not in the garden anymore. But take a look at this verse:

Deuteronomy 1:39,

39. Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

Here, Moses is speaking of little children, who were alive early on in the wilderness wanderings, that they would be permitted to enter the Promised Land while their parents would die, because of the unbelief engendered by the 10 spies back in Numbers 13.

These children were young enough to have no knowledge between good and evil, meaning, they had no moral compass sufficient to teach them the difference between doing what is right versus doing what is wrong.

In other words, they were morally innocent, just as Adam and Eve once were, before the Fall.

That moral innocence is with every child ever born. It is, like with Adam and Eve, however, eventually lost. The question is when?

It is lost here:

Romans 7:7-11,

7. What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
10. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
11. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

People do not know (aren't even aware of) sin, except through the presence of law forbidding immoral behavior.

People aren't even aware of experiencing lust in themselves except there is a law telling them it is wrong to lust (or covet, in this case).

Then, through Paul's use of personification, he writes that sin, as a spiritual force, seized upon the fact such a commandment existed, and used it against him to cause all sorts of concupiscence (that is, desiring things forbidden by God, just like the "forbidden fruit").

But, had there not been any law, sin, as a spiritual, personified force, would have been nullified and rendered inactive in his life. This is the initial condition of all humans born, and even of Adam and Eve, before the Fall. Children are innocent, there is no law they are capable of comprehending, and so, sin is ineffectual in taking hold on them and slaying them, as it were.

This is what Paul meant by "I was alive once without the law". What's he's saying is, before the law of God was comprehensible to him, meaning when he was too young to have knowledge between good and evil, he was fully alive, or, more effectively, like Adam and Eve before the Fall, he had the right to the tree of life (that is, to eternal life), just like all babies, infants, toddlers, and many, many children (all of whom, should they die in such an age, have the right to the tree of life, or eternal life).

It wasn't until there was a commandment to not covet, or etc., that this whole sin thing became an issue. Had God never told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, had they still done so, there would have never been a Fall with which to contend, because there would have been no transgression because there would have been no deception from the serpent. Imagine that for a moment. It wasn't the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that caused the Fall, it was Adam's disobedience to God that did. It wasn't knowing good and evil that lost our parents the paradise God had made for them, it was the punishment they incurred as a result of breaking the commandment, or law of God regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

These commandments, then, are supposed to grant us life, that is, free us from the wages of sin, the penalty which is death (that is, had Adam and Eve never eaten, that is, broke the commandment of God, they would have remained alive forever). The same is true for Paul, and for everyone else. If people the world over, time immemorial, do not break the laws of God, they are ordained to life.

But the personified spiritual force of sin, much like the serpent in the Garden, takes hold of the commandments of God, and twists and perverts them, and uses them against the people God has commanded, to corrupt then enslave them.

The question then is, can any human other than Jesus Christ successfully resist the personified, spiritual force of sin perfectly, at every turn and juncture, for their entire life?

Well, Enoch was such a man. Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD, and however we might judge him for his drunken behavior after the flood, guess what? At that time there was no law forbidding the cultivation and fermentation of grapes for the purpose of making wine and becoming intoxicated upon its consumption. So, what does that mean?

No law, no sin. So, there is then no record of Noah ever sinning, only a record of him receiving grace. The same with Abraham. Look closely at Romans 4, particularly verse 15:

15. Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

We look back at Abraham and judge him as a liar regarding telling Sarah to say she was his sister and not his wife. But note! What law did he break?

If my kids, for example, are not breaking any rules I've established in the home, there is no wrath (anger or need to punish/chastise). Why? Because if no law exists, to do a thing is not wrong or against my wishes.

The same with Abraham. He believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. His faith saved him and made him whole. There is no account of him breaking any "law" given by God. Even regarding Hagar and Ishmael. Or killing men in a tribal skirmish to rescue Lot.

In fact, the same is true of Isaac and Jacob. Sure, we look back on these men and judge them for their moral failures, wherever they occured, but that's only because we view them through the lens of various laws of God that have come down to us after they lived and existed. Prior to Exodus, there were very few laws on the books, so to say.

This is why Paul takes us back to Abraham and his faith being accounted to him as righteousness, as opposed to Moses, for example. We have an instance with Moses where we know he directly and intentionally broke a commandment of God. The same with King David.

But as for Abraham, it's merely righteousness accounted to him by faith, before circumcision.

And in this we learn a great truth: you can't have righteousness accounted to you while having the wages of sin accounted to you at the same time. The first engenders eternal life, the second, eternal death. You can't be alive and dead at the same time. Or saved and unsaved. Or etc.

So, if your faith has saved thee, and made thee whole, it has been accounted to you as righteousness, meaning you are justified, and innocent in God's eyes, just like Adam and Eve were before the Fall, and just like you used to be, when you were a little one who didn't have knowledge between good and evil.

[Apostolic1ness]

Originally Posted by votivesoul

Fair enough. Not in the garden anymore. But take a look at this verse:

Deuteronomy 1:39,



Here, Moses is speaking of little children, who were alive early on in the wilderness wanderings, that they would be permitted to enter the Promised Land while their parents would die, because of the unbelief engendered by the 10 spies back in Numbers 13.

These children were young enough to have no knowledge between good and evil, meaning, they had no moral compass sufficient to teach them the difference between doing what is right versus doing what is wrong.

In other words, they were morally innocent, just as Adam and Eve once were, before the Fall.

That moral innocence is with every child ever born. It is, like with Adam and Eve, however, eventually lost. The question is when?

It is lost here:

Romans 7:7-11,



People do not know (aren't even aware of) sin, except through the presence of law forbidding immoral behavior.

People aren't even aware of experiencing lust in themselves except there is a law telling them it is wrong to lust (or covet, in this case).

Then, through Paul's use of personification, he writes that sin, as a spiritual force, seized upon the fact such a commandment existed, and used it against him to cause all sorts of concupiscence (that is, desiring things forbidden by God, just like the "forbidden fruit").

But, had there not been any law, sin, as a spiritual, personified force, would have been nullified and rendered inactive in his life. This is the initial condition of all humans born, and even of Adam and Eve, before the Fall. Children are innocent, there is no law they are capable of comprehending, and so, sin is ineffectual in taking hold on them and slaying them, as it were.

This is what Paul meant by "I was alive once without the law". What's he's saying is, before the law of God was comprehensible to him, meaning when he was too young to have knowledge between good and evil, he was fully alive, or, more effectively, like Adam and Eve before the Fall, he had the right to the tree of life (that is, to eternal life), just like all babies, infants, toddlers, and many, many children (all of whom, should they die in such an age, have the right to the tree of life, or eternal life).

It wasn't until there was a commandment to not covet, or etc., that this whole sin thing became an issue. Had God never told Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, had they still done so, there would have never been a Fall with which to contend, because there would have been no transgression because there would have been no deception from the serpent. Imagine that for a moment. It wasn't the fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil that caused the Fall, it was Adam's disobedience to God that did. It wasn't knowing good and evil that lost our parents the paradise God had made for them, it was the punishment they incurred as a result of breaking the commandment, or law of God regarding the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

These commandments, then, are supposed to grant us life, that is, free us from the wages of sin, the penalty which is death (that is, had Adam and Eve never eaten, that is, broke the commandment of God, they would have remained alive forever). The same is true for Paul, and for everyone else. If people the world over, time immemorial, do not break the laws of God, they are ordained to life.

But the personified spiritual force of sin, much like the serpent in the Garden, takes hold of the commandments of God, and twists and perverts them, and uses them against the people God has commanded, to corrupt then enslave them.

The question then is, can any human other than Jesus Christ successfully resist the personified, spiritual force of sin perfectly, at every turn and juncture, for their entire life?

Well, Enoch was such a man. Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD, and however we might judge him for his drunken behavior after the flood, guess what? At that time there was no law forbidding the cultivation and fermentation of grapes for the purpose of making wine and becoming intoxicated upon its consumption. So, what does that mean?

No law, no sin. So, there is then no record of Noah ever sinning, only a record of him receiving grace. The same with Abraham. Look closely at Romans 4, particularly verse 15:



We look back at Abraham and judge him as a liar regarding telling Sarah to say she was his sister and not his wife. But note! What law did he break?

If my kids, for example, are not breaking any rules I've established in the home, there is no wrath (anger or need to punish/chastise). Why? Because if no law exists, to do a thing is not wrong or against my wishes.

The same with Abraham. He believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. His faith saved him and made him whole. There is no account of him breaking any "law" given by God. Even regarding Hagar and Ishmael. Or killing men in a tribal skirmish to rescue Lot.

In fact, the same is true of Isaac and Jacob. Sure, we look back on these men and judge them for their moral failures, wherever they occured, but that's only because we view them through the lens of various laws of God that have come down to us after they lived and existed. Prior to Exodus, there were very few laws on the books, so to say.

This is why Paul takes us back to Abraham and his faith being accounted to him as righteousness, as opposed to Moses, for example. We have an instance with Moses where we know he directly and intentionally broke a commandment of God. The same with King David.

But as for Abraham, it's merely righteousness accounted to him by faith, before circumcision.

And in this we learn a great truth: you can't have righteousness accounted to you while having the wages of sin accounted to you at the same time. The first engenders eternal life, the second, eternal death. You can't be alive and dead at the same time. Or saved and unsaved. Or etc.

So, if your faith has saved thee, and made thee whole, it has been accounted to you as righteousness, meaning you are justified, and innocent in God's eyes, just like Adam and Eve were before the Fall, and just like you used to be, when you were a little one who didn't have knowledge between good and evil.

Ok few questions.
1. Wasnt there evil during Noahs day? Was it considered sin without the law.
2. Was sinful acts still sin before the law was written?
3. If it takes the law for people to guilty of sin because they have no knowledge of sin without it. Are those that were without the law ever in sin?
4. Do we need to be taught to be angry, jealous, to lie? I would say no I beleive these things are in our nature.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Apostolic1ness

Ok few questions.
1. Wasnt there evil during Noahs day? Was it considered sin without the law.
2. Was sinful acts still sin before the law was written?
3. If it takes the law for people to guilty of sin because they have no knowledge of sin without it. Are those that were without the law ever in sin?
4. Do we need to be taught to be angry, jealous, to lie? I would say no I beleive these things are in our nature.

I don't have a lot of time right now, so please let the short and sweet suffice for now!

1.) Yes, there was evil in Noah's day. The question is, of what kind? Noah's day is not very far removed from Cain's and Abel's day. God told Cain that if he did well, then well, but if not, sin was at the door, and desired to have him (personified spiritual force).

So, Cain murdered Abel, that is, sin took hold of him and led him to off his bro. This stems from hating his brother, which is the position taken in 1 John when it references Cain and compares it to us hating each other.

The point is, the only sin then at the time was hating one's brother and murder. So, the evil of Noah's day was just that. No new laws were added until after the Flood, which had to do with what? With murder! If by man, man's blood is shed, by man shall his blood also be shed, or something very close to that. It's in Genesis 9, I believe. So, that was the evil in Noah's day. Take a look at Lamech, too, to see how it was murder that was the main issue then.

2.) Paul wrote that without the law, there is no transgression, and so did John, although he worded it differently, that sin is the transgression of the law.

So, where there is no law, there is no transgression, meaning there is no sin. If it's not on the books, that is, in the Holy Scriptures, you cannot make the claim that something is a sin, a part from personal revelation or conviction. Maybe some "thing" then becomes a sin for you, but you cannot successfully make it binding on others.

3.) Those who are without the law can become a law unto themselves, if they do by nature those things contained within the law. Likewise, if you take young children, infants, etc. you see that they are NOT sinners, because there is no law for them to obey, because they literally cannot obey because they literally cannot understand. The same could be said of people with traumatic birth defects who have little to almost no cognitive functions.

These all are without the law, so are also without sin.

4.) Most bad behavior is learned behavior. Apart from that, however, one's temperament is not sinful. It's what one does or how one acts, that is the sin, or not. You can be angry and sin not, right? Jealous and not sin? Etc.? Sin is the transgression of the law. Transgression implies action. Without action, there is no transgression.

When it comes to things like hatred or adulterous thoughts, for example, there is a mental line that has to be crossed, an action of thought and inward intent. This is what makes these things transgressions. But otherwise, it's what comes out of a man that defiles him, not necessarily the things that are inside of him. Sure, it's a fine line, but a person can stay on the right side of it, as they learn to yield themselves unto righteousness and seek the power of the Holy Spirit to overcome.

[Amanah]

what if being born in sin, means being born in flesh, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes. If there was no issue with being in flesh, why do we need to guard ourselves so?

Romans 7 King James Version (KJV)
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Amanah

what if being born in sin, means being born in flesh, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes. If there was no issue with being in flesh, why do we need to guard ourselves so?

Romans 7 King James Version (KJV)
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

You are on to something here. Hopefully I can come back to this later tonight and dig into your thoughts and why I agree.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Amanah

what if being born in sin, means being born in flesh, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes. If there was no issue with being in flesh, why do we need to guard ourselves so?

Romans 7 King James Version (KJV)
12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
13 Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
14 For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19 For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21 I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24 O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Originally Posted by votivesoul

You are on to something here. Hopefully I can come back to this later tonight and dig into your thoughts and why I agree.

This how it looks to me:

In Adam all die, right (1 Corinthians 15:22)?

And the wages of sin is death, correct (Romans 6:23)?

Therefore, to be in Adam, is to receive the wages of sin, which is death.

To be carnally minded is death (Romans 8:6).

Therefore, to be carnally minded, is to still be in Adam; the carnal mind will cause someone to reap the wages of sin, which is death. Or, said another way, the wages of sin is a carnal mind, which is death.

To be carnally minded is to be in the flesh, and those who are in the flesh, cannot please God (Romans 8:7-8).

Without faith it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6), indicating then that to be "without faith" is to be in the flesh, which is to be carnally minded, which is death, which is the wages of sin, all of which is the result of being in Adam and not in Christ.

John 1:12-13,

12. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13. Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

To be born naturally in this life is to be "in Adam". To be reborn in this life is to be "in Christ" through which all who are in Christ, shall be made alive, at the resurrection.

This new birth is the means whereby we become the sons of God. Our rebirth gives us the right to be called the sons of God. This rebirth has nothing to do with our mamas and papas (John 3:1-8), or the will of anyone's flesh, that is, their carnal mind, or the activities between a man and a woman that bring about a baby. It is all of it conceived in the mind of God and is a completely spiritual thing. The seed (Read sperma from the Greek) that we are reborn of, is incorruptible seed, by the Word of God (1 Peter 1:23). When we are resurrected, our corruption shall put on incorruption, that is, the seed that gave us new life in Christ will come to full fruition and the law of sin and death in our members will be no more. Death, where is thy sting, indeed! The last vestiges of our flesh, or carnal mind, will be erased from our being.

Therefore, to be a son of God is to be in Christ. So, when first born of a woman with the obvious help of a man, is to be placed in Adam. At that time, we have the Adamic, or human nature of our ancestor. But when we are born from above, with the obvious help of our Savior, is to be placed in Christ. We have the Messianic, or divine nature of our ancestor.

This is the contrast between flesh and Spirit, Adam and Christ. We are all born into the first, and some then, are (re)born into the second.

[Amanah]

Good explanation Bro Aaron, when we are regenerated, we receive the mind of Christ

1 Corinthians 2
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? but we have the mind of Christ.