Quote:
Originally Posted by katiemygirl
You are saying:
1. Babies don't get a soul until they are born, until they take their first breath.
2. Sin nature is genetically transferred, therefore, babies are spiritually dead.
If you don't believe that babies get a soul until they take their first breath, then you must believe abortion is an acceptable practice. I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'll let you explain. I would also ask you to provide specific scripture to support your view.
|
Abortion should not be taken lightly. It is not something that should be used as a means of birth control. But if a womans life was endangered as a result of carrying the fetus to full term, then an abortion would be fine.
There are two schools of orthodox thought as to the origin of the soul.
One view is that of
Traducianism and refers to the creation of the soul through procreation - human generation. Tertullian held that view. The Bible does not support that position.
The other view is
Creationism which recognizes that the soul is directly created by God and imparted to the body. The question is when does God impart the soul to the body. And there are different views on when ensoulment occurs. Some believe that ensoulment is at conception. Others hold to the view that ensoulment is at the point of physical birth.
I hold to the latter view.
Just as the body after death is an empty house because the soul has separated from the body and gone either into the presence of God, or in the case of the unbeliever, into the 'torments' side of Hades, so too the developing body of the fetus is an empty house which is under construction.
The fetus has biological life, but not human life. Human life begins when the soul has been imparted to the body.
Just as God first created Adam's body and then breathed the breath of life (neshamah) into Adam, the pattern remains the same with everyone who is born. With the exception of Adam whose body was directly created by God, everyones body is the result of procreation. When it has been fully formed and can live independently of the mother, God ensouls that body with the breath of life.
There are a number of misunderstood passages which seem to contradict the Bible's position that human life (as opposed to biological life) begins at birth. Passages such as
Psalms 139:13; Jeremiah 1:5; Luke 1:15; Luke 1:41; Luke 11:27-28; Exodus 21:22-25.
I'll refer to just one of them to keep this short.
Luke 1:15 which is a prophecy of John the Baptist's birth.
''For he will be great in the sight of the Lord, and he will drink no wine or liquor; and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit, while yet in his mother's womb.''
Pastor R.B. Thieme JR. in his book 'The Origin of Human Life' on p. 38,39 writes...
'The context of Luke 1:15 reveals the angel Gabriel's prophecy of Zecharias, husband of Elizabeth, concerning his future son, John the Baptist. Critical to the meaning of this verse is understanding the last phrase, ''while yet in his mother's womb.''
Ek koilias, used again here, is inadequately translated in verse 15 ''in the womb.''
Koilias is the ablative singular of
koilia, ''in the womb.'' The ablative case preceded by the preposition
ek denotes separation.
Ek must be understood as connoting separation: ''out from'' or ''away from.'' The phrase in question should be translated, ''yet [in the future] separated from his mother's womb.'' Luke, the human author, is continuing the connotation of separation found in the use of
mibeten in the Old Testament and
ek koilias in the LXX. In other words, the ablative of separation indicates John must be born before he can be enpowered or endued by the Spirit.'
The New International Version correctly translates the phrase as
'and he will be filled with the Holy Spirit even from birth.'
So as can be seen, the proper translation of
Luke 1:15 shows that Luke did not say that John the Baptist would be filled with the Holy Spirit in the womb, but after he was born.
The Bible sets the bounderies of human life (when the soul is in the body) between birth and physical death
(Ecc 3:2; Isa 9:6; Matt 11:11; Luke 2:10-11; Job 3:11; Job 14:1; Job 15:14; Job 38:21).
Quote:
|
Adam and Eve did not have a sin nature, yet they sinned. Why? Because they had "choice." We sin because we have choice, not because sinful nature is genetically transferred from our parents. Sin is a spiritual choice. It is a spiritual entity that separates man from God. Sin itself, is not phsyical but spiritual in nature. (Isa. 59:2) Sinful acts may be physical, but sin itself is a spiritual choice made in the mind. (Mark 7:14-23) and not subject to physical traits. It is the soul that sins. The body carries out the act. Sin first originates in the heart, then is dwelt upon in the mind, and finally acted out physically.
|
The old sin nature is one of three sources of temptation. The three sources of temptation are the world, the flesh (the sin nature), and the devil. Satan can only be in one place at a time and is very busy. He tempted Jesus in the wilderness, but he is not going to bother with
directly tempting the average believer. His cosmic system (the world) however, is a major source of temptation. The
internal source of temptation is the sin nature. While Adam's original sin is imputed to the old sin nature, Personal sin does not originate in the sin nature. Temptation is what originates in the sin nature. The source of sin is the
volition which when it gives in to the temptation gives birth to sin.
Eve had no sin nature before the fall, but was tempted by Satan. Adam seeing her in her fallen condition had to choose between his relationship with God and his relationship with her, and he chose her. So he took the fruit from her hand and ate.
Quote:
|
It is impossible that sin or sin nature could be transferred through genetic material. Are you saying we have a "sin gene?" Genetic material can only produce physical qualities, not spiritual qualities. Sin nature cannot be passed on in the same way that eye color, disease, etc are. If so, then what is the genetic marker we can point to and say, "Ohhh, there's the sin gene?"
|
The reason that Jesus had to come into the world through a virgin birth was to avoid being born with a sin nature which is passed genetically through the sperm of the male.
The Bible has a number of passages which demonstrate that the sin nature is in the flesh. One of which is Romans 7:14-25
Romans 7:14 For we know that the Law is spiritual; but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin. 15] For that which I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. 16] But if I do the very thing I do not wish to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that it is good, 17] So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which indwells me. 18] For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the wishing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. 19] For the good that I wish, I do not do; but I practice the very evil that I do not wish. 20] But if I am doing the very thing I do not wish, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. 21] I find then the principle that evil is present in me, the one who wishes to do good. 22] For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, 23] but I see a different law in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind, and making me a prisoner of the law of sin which is in my members. 24] Wretched man that I am!. Who will set me free from the body of this death? 25] Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.
Paul distinquishes between the inner man (the soul) and his body which is a prisoner of the law of sin.
In
Romans 6:6 Paul calls the old sin nature
'our body of sin.'
The sin nature cannot be in the soul because the soul is directly created by God and is perfect.
Quote:
|
Immediately after Adam and Eve sinned, God describes the penalty imputed to Adam, Eve, and the Serpent. It never mentions that all of Adam's descendants will inherit a sinful nature. Again, Adam and Eve did not need a sinful nature to disobey God, yet you believe that we do.
|
As I said above, the source of
personal sin is not the sin nature, but the volition. The sin nature is one of three sources of
temptation.
Adam's original sin is imputed to the sin nature which results in spiritual death, but your personal sins come from your volition.
The reason that the many were made sinners
(Romans 5:19) through the disobedience of one man, which resulted in condemnation to all men
(Romans 5:18) is because Adam's original sin was imputed by God to the genetically transmitted sin nature. Recall
Romans 7:14-25.
Quote:
Scripture nowhere suggests that babies are born spiritually dead. You cannot base a doctrine on assumption. You must have scriptural support. Without it, the doctrine is false.
Katie
|
The scriptural support given above should be sufficient.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
