Tha Fall of Man and the Law of Sin

[Livelystone]

The difference from how we were born versus how Jesus was born is the result of who is the father. The Father of Jesus is the eternal God from Heaven, while on the other hand the father of our natural born life living under the curse of death is from the earth, and is descended from Adam. Because life is in the blood and sin causes death, “in Adam all men die,” because of the sin handed down to us from Adam via our fathers that Jesus did not get from His Father; makes our blood different from the Blood of Jesus (1Cor.15:22).

From the start God’s mandate stated a seed must reproduce the image from what it came from, and because sin caused Adam to fall from the original sinless image of God he was first created in; God’s mandate meant that the image of the seed coming from Adam continue Adam’s sinful nature into the next generation. Therefore, the one-time clean, sinless, spirit and seed intended for humanity originally found in Adam from when God first breathed life into the form of Adam, was because of his disobedience to God no longer clean and without sin. This was accomplished when and how the spirit of man was joined together with the seed of the serpent that we can find within the curse given to Adam and Eve (who became one flesh Ge.2:24) for disobeying God. From that point on the serpent seed within the spirit of man was sentenced to “eat dust” through consuming the flesh of man (made from the dust of the earth) all the days of his life (Ge.3:14-15).

What Paul called the “law of sin,” as something “living within my members,” (Ro.7:23) lived within the unclean spirit of man Paul had inherited from the “seed” coming from his earthly father that was Paul’s original source of life. The law of sin is an evil principality living within mankind that can be found in every natural born man from the time of their conception until the time of their death (Ps.51:5). This evil principality did not appear in Jesus, because His source of life did not come from an earthly father. The "law of sin" is the serpent’s seed Paul called “ the messenger of Satan,” living in the spirit and soul of mankind that gives Satan dominion over the kingdoms of the earth. (Luke 4:5, 2Cor. 12:7)

Jesus, born from above never disobeyed His father, and by not having the law of sin in Him is why Jesus was able to call Satan, the “prince of this world who hath nothing in me," (Jn.14:30). Putting all of the above together allows us to see how the Blood of Jesus fulfills the prophecy within the blood of the Passover lamb sprinkled upon the doorposts of our heart is able to save us from sin and death. (1Jn.1:7). Because priests who do not live forever administered the blood of bulls and goats, and not through the testament of their own blood, the blood of animals cannot wash away the sins of man, and only served as a type and shadow pointing to the Blood of Jesus Christ. Therefore, the Passover ritual and Day of Atonement rituals are perpetual sacrifices done each year by the Jews.

When you take the definitions for the words found in the phrase "law of sin," and put them together describes sin as a principality that defines it as a life-giving force albeit it is one unto death. The way the word “law” is being used here is the same as how the term “law of gravity” is always in effect unless overcome by a more powerful law. Consequently, the law of sin is continually wielding its power within us until it is overcome by a more powerful law such as the law of faith found within Christians that is more powerful than the law of sin is. This is because the law of faith is based on truths coming from the “seed of Christ in us” who has been given a name more powerful than any other name, and living in us as an antidote against the law of sin still in us. Because the law of faith coming from God is a law of truth makes the law of faith more powerful law than the law of sin that accomplishes its purposes through earthly man-made lies. This enables Christians with knowledge of the truth of the foundational doctrines of Christ (He.6:1-2) the ability to overcome temptation coming from the law of sin providing their knowledge is based on truth, and not false doctrines being taught by man.

Consequently, while we were born from a spirit that inclines us to commit sin, Jesus was born from the Holy Spirit of God who cannot sin. The good news is through the blessings of Pentecost and Passover together, we are born again with a partial gift of the Holy Spirit (2Cor.1:22) from the same Spirit of God that lived a sinless life in Jesus, which by law will live sinless in us as well. Because of this when a Christian commits a sin, it is the unclean sinful spirit of the “old man” still in them (Adam in us still under a sentence of death) who commits the sin, and not the Holy Spirit of Christ Jesus freely given to us.

The reason why James told us not to be double minded is because Christians having both the spirit of man still in them from their natural born birth, and the Holy Spirit in them from their born again experience, allows them to hear from both spirits. On the other hand persons without the Holy Spirit only receive instruction from the spirit of man along with its knowledge of both good and evil, but still held captive under the dominion of the prince and power of darkness. Because the spirit of man is still under the dominion of Satan is why mankind cannot root evil out of the human race no matter how hard they try.

Christians who have been given the Holy Spirit have been given the power to become sons of God, and sons of God do not sin. However, at the start of our journey we are only given an “earnest of the spirit” meaning only a partial payment of the Holy Spirit because the seed that is Christ in us is only the bare grain of the Holy Spirit, and not a fully mature Tree of Life whose name is Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God. (1Cor.15:37)

The journey from “Christ the seed” to a fully mature tree of life is what our sanctification is all about as it takes the Christian from being a babe in Christ to becoming a seasoned elder qualified to lay hands on others having already become a conduit for God’s miraculous healing powers. Fortunately, because it is a law of God, the law of the seed specifies that by law, and not whether it is seen either “darkly or clearly,” the seed that is Christ in us can only produce an image of Jesus Christ. However, there is no guarantee that it will ever produce anything! This is the message behind the parables of the talents and the “sower of the seed,” where the end result is most of the seeds do not produce anything, and only a few become 100 fold fully mature trees of life. (Luke 8:5-15)

The doctrine of original sin is a doctrine that not too many years ago was well established within the theological knowledge of most Christian denominations. Unfortunately, since then many have been led away from this understanding, and doing so has not been to their advantage. Now that we are leaving the 2000-year period of the Pentecostal anointing, and moving into the age for receiving the greater Tabernacles anointing, knowledge of the truth is going to be a requirement for us if we do not want to be found lacking the necessary anointing, and in the similitude of the foolish virgins.

[bbyrd009]

The doctrine of Original Sin is a farce, and could no be defined even by the Council of Trent, who insisted upon it over Augusine's objections. While it is not needed in order for one to agree with your entire missive, excluding the last paragraph, it is essential in order to subjugate a population, and you have bought a nefarious line, told to you by some guy, who misinterprets Scripture, sorry. A baby cannot sin, and there is fulsome evidence in Scripture for the principle of Original Sin being a farce. You have been deceived, and some quite simple study will point out the lie to you. This article
http://www.wikihow.com/Recognize-the...ristian-Models
will quote God on the matter for you, and I'm curious what you might think about it.

Christ died for our sins; but He rose, and lives. Peace to you.

[Livelystone]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

The doctrine of Original Sin is a farce, and could no be defined even by the Council of Trent, who insisted upon it over Augusine's objections. While it is not needed in order for one to agree with your entire missive, excluding the last paragraph, it is essential in order to subjugate a population, and you have bought a nefarious line, told to you by some guy, who misinterprets Scripture, sorry. A baby cannot sin, and there is fulsome evidence in Scripture for the principle of Original Sin being a farce. You have been deceived, and some quite simple study will point out the lie to you. This article
http://www.wikihow.com/Recognize-the...ristian-Models
will quote God on the matter for you, and I'm curious what you might think about it.

Christ died for our sins; but He rose, and lives. Peace to you.

Looking at the link you provided it seems that you are the one between the two of us who has been led away by the teachings of man. I do not sit at the feet of any man, and if you do a search on the book whose cover appears as my avatar you can read what no one else has ever taught since the time of the apostles who “spoke in a mystery”.

As far as the opinions of your early councils or early writers, they do not get any more credit from me then your link does that is influenced by the studies of other religions for determining how to worship God. Bottom line is those who worship in spirit and in truth are able to have their faith proven in the same manner that James said his faith could be proven. That my friend is only when God uses you as a conduit when answering your prayers with miracles and signs and wonders the same way, God did for the apostles.

Being as most of my post cannot be read anywhere else I am left with the conclusion you are looking to argue something that is way over your head.

On the other hand if you want to take time and legitimately debate my post by considering the Scriptures I have provided, and how you can prove they mean something different from what I have said, I will be willing to take the time to read more of what you have to say.

Other than that we are already finished.

Fair enough?

Blessings

Doug

[Nitehawk013]

This place sure does attract a fair number of self-appointed "modern day prophets" who are quite certain they are the only ones right about scripture.

[Livelystone]

Originally Posted by Nitehawk013

This place sure does attract a fair number of self-appointed "modern day prophets" who are quite certain they are the only ones right about scripture.

The titles “prophet and apostle” are IMO about the most misused words associated with titles given today. Not that the title of "pastors" is much better when you consider of the 7 times they are mentioned in the Old Testament, only one time are they done so favorably.

On the other hand God's laws for determining truth when followed as God lays them out for us to follow, allows anyone to come to the truth. Seems from what you are saying that has not yet happened with you.

However, the testimony of Christ is the spirit of prophecy that should allow anyone with the testimony of Christ to understand the prophecies of the Scripture. That is what allowed the apostles and prophets of the Bible who were on one accord with each other to worship in spirit and in truth.

Now do you have anything to contribute supported with scripture either postively or negatively about the post I made, or are you just one more person who likes to throw around slanderous remarks like two old ladies at the fence gossiping about the young ones?

Fair enough?

[bbyrd009]

Originally Posted by Livelystone

Looking at the link you provided it seems that you are the one between the two of us who has been led away by the teachings of man. I do not sit at the feet of any man, and if you do a search on the book whose cover appears as my avatar you can read what no one else has ever taught since the time of the apostles who “spoke in a mystery”.

Um, not interested in your opinion of me; and pass for now, but ty.

Originally Posted by Livelystone

As far as the opinions of your early councils or early writers, they do not get any more credit from me then your link does that is influenced by the studies of other religions for determining how to worship God.

Translation: "I am oblivious to the Council of Trent, and the initial schism that divided the Christian Church; and I am now so steeped in a spurious "Christianity" of the Western stripe that I cannot even see the forest for the trees (being as how I read the 'early writers,' like it or not, by translation, every time I open my Bible), let alone argue for Original Sin, or even define it satisfactorily to this body."

Originally Posted by Livelystone

Being as most of my post cannot be read anywhere else I am left with the conclusion you are looking to argue something that is way over your head.

Um, what? And ty, but I seem to be doing fine at the moment.

Originally Posted by Livelystone

On the other hand if you want to take time and legitimately debate my post by considering the Scriptures I have provided, and how you can prove they mean something different from what I have said, I will be willing to take the time to read more of what you have to say.

Now you're talking! I say that your references have been heinously mis-interpreted to you, for the purposes of subjugating us, and that A BABY CANNOT SIN, all of which is outlined in step one of the article, with quotes from God ("No more will I contest with man, whose thoughts are evil FROM HIS YOUTH") below; what say you?

Originally Posted by Livelystone

Other than that we are already finished.

Fair enough?

Um, did you just dismiss me?
Are you for real?

Originally Posted by Livelystone

Blessings

Doug

Can also be curses...looking forward to your riposte, Doug.

[bbyrd009]

[bbyrd009]

I would be curious to hear anyone's defense of Original Sin; I will not even reply! It was traveling to locales as a worker bee that I absorbed other Christian doctrines, and came to see how self-defeating this doctrine was, from all but the empire-builder's standpoint. Which led me to O.S., which despite 10 years of Sunday school, I discovered I knew nothing about. So I asked a preacher, and you shoulda seen his face youda thought I was asking him to sanction a re-crucifixion I knew after that, really. Shhh, it's a big secret, better not tell

[Livelystone]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

Um, not interested in your opinion of me; and pass for now, but ty.
Translation: "I am oblivious to the Council of Trent, and the initial schism that divided the Christian Church; and I am now so steeped in a spurious "Christianity" of the Western stripe that I cannot even see the forest for the trees (being as how I read the 'early writers,' like it or not, by translation, every time I open my Bible), let alone argue for Original Sin, or even define it satisfactorily to this body."Um, what? And ty, but I seem to be doing fine at the moment.
Now you're talking! I say that your references have been heinously mis-interpreted to you, for the purposes of subjugating us, and that A BABY CANNOT SIN, all of which is outlined in step one of the article, with quotes from God ("No more will I contest with man, whose thoughts are evil FROM HIS YOUTH") below; what say you?

Um, did you just dismiss me?
Are you for real?
Can also be curses...looking forward to your riposte, Doug.

All of your rambling reveals someone who has been educated beyond their level of intelligence.

For your information the word “sin” appears within the Scriptures as both a verb and a noun. Babies do not have to commit the verb (transgression a.k.a. violation of the law of God) to have the noun that is passed down to them through the seed coming from their earthly father.

If you're willing to depart the legend of your own mind and take a look at the Scriptures you will see that babies are born under the curse of death, and it is sin that causes death (at least according to the Scriptures if you're willing to consider them)

This is something that Jesus was not born with because he came from a heavenly father with the seed of the Holy Spirit that cannot sin, and not the seed within the spirit of man that all naturally conceived babies come from.

Furthermore, if babies were not born with sin as a noun in them that's definition defines it as a living principality even though it is one unto death because it resulted from the curse, "you shall die," God would be violating his own promise not to hold the child responsible for the sins of the parents.

Of course I understand people such as yourself who have difficulty adding 2+2 and coming up with the correct answer, have chosen to go outside of the Scriptures and look to other religions for how they are to worship God.

How repugnant

Blessings anyway

Doug

[Livelystone]

Originally Posted by bbyrd009

I would be curious to hear anyone's defense of Original Sin; I will not even reply! It was traveling to locales as a worker bee that I absorbed other Christian doctrines, and came to see how self-defeating this doctrine was, from all but the empire-builder's standpoint. Which led me to O.S., which despite 10 years of Sunday school, I discovered I knew nothing about. So I asked a preacher, and you shoulda seen his face youda thought I was asking him to sanction a re-crucifixion I knew after that, really. Shhh, it's a big secret, better not tell

The defense of original sin is already laid out in my original post with Scripture references. I'm more than willing to discuss it with you but I would like you to consider the Bible as the only source of authority and not the words of any man no matter who they may be.

If you can do that we can have a dialogue on the subject.

Blessings

Doug