https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmnCYrcQqH4

"The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."
{Ezekiel 18:20 KJV}

ochibuogwu5:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HmnCYrcQqH4

It looks like a panel discussion, and it's a 58-minute video. I'm disinclined to watch it, not least because Bible teaching is not a democratic exercise.

Regardless what the video says, it is true that no human descendant inherits the sins of its forebears. Each person is responsible for their own sins.

It is important, however, to note that because of Adam's own witting disobedience to God, all of his descendants inherit a sin nature, that is, a flesh that is sinful, so long as they are born of male seed. That is what Romans 5:19 teaches. Our physical bodies, derived from male and female seeds, are bodies of sin (Romans 6:6; Romans 7). This is why there is no righteous person (except the Lord Jesus Christ Whose physical body was conceived not of male and female seeds, but of female only). The corruption of our bodies guarantees that we all sin from birth until we die.

In conclusion, we do not inherit sin from our parents, but we do inherit a sinful physical body from them that guarantees that we will sin and therefore need Salvation from God.

Ihedinobi3:

It looks like a panel discussion, and it's a 58-minute video. I'm disinclined to watch it, not least because Bible teaching is not a democratic exercise.

Regardless what the video says, it is true that no human descendant inherits the sins of its forebears. Each person is responsible for their own sins.

Thanks. I agree up to here. I'm not too good deciphering the religious speak in the rest and you know how we'd get when I delve.

budaatum:

Thanks. I agree up to here. I'm not too good deciphering the religious speak in the rest and you know how we'd get when I delve.

You're welcome, and I'm quite happy to agree on something with you when the agreement is in the Truth.

I think that I should clarify that I only ever have a problem with people when they look at something straight in its face and still deny what it says. I find that very hard to excuse, especially when it affects the well-being of other believers. This is the only thing that occasions my "getting" any type of way when, as you say, we delve.

I am fine with disagreement, even if I prefer agreement. If an atheist told me straight out that he doesn't agree with something I say, I may ask why just for the record, but only for the record. Everyone has the right to believe whatever they please. What I take exception to is anyone making it a sort of duty to either confuse or deceive others all because they prefer a point of view and will not allow anything to even suggest that it may be wrong.

To explain, I have a personal rule of thumb to never try to "evangelize" an atheist. I get that such a person has made a choice, and typically doesn't want to hear anything about the Gospel, so I won't make the offer. So, I don't start threads attacking atheism or atheists, and I don't start threads to "preach the Gospel". My threads are specific to Christians, and even so, I take pains to make them unobtrusive but also as accessible as possible to everyone. When I join a conversation, it is always to answer a question directed at the Bible or at Christians, or else it is to protect other believers from attacks made on their faith. This is what brings me into contact with atheists. Otherwise, we would probably never discuss with each other.

The trouble begins when the atheist who posts a challenge to the Bible or Christians suddenly finds that there is a reasonable answer to that challenge for which they are not prepared. That is when the effort to prove the absurdity of Christianity goes awry and the atheist begins to use tactics that make me increasingly antagonistic toward them because I know what effect those tactics can have on a weak believer.

I am willing to believe that you, for example, may not really intend to cause harm with your actions when we discuss, not least because I have a desire to accommodate everyone, if perchance I may save some, but I do not pretend that things are not what they seem only because I wish that they weren't. This is why I am answering you now: to give you the benefit of the doubt in the hope that I judged you wrong earlier.

Perhaps, you will receive this post as an insult or something along the same lines, but I hope that you don't. I do wish that you and I and others besides could talk "religious-speak" comfortably and encourage one another to please the Lord Jesus Christ in all things. That is partly what I hope for in these conversations, but I realize that it is a choice I cannot make for other people, so my primary duty is to protect those who have made the choice in the first place. This may mean that if you have no use for the Lord Jesus and His Truth, you and I will always run the risk of "get[ting that way] when [you] delve".

Cheers.

Ihedinobi3:

You're welcome, and I'm quite happy to agree on something with you when the agreement is in the Truth.

You too. I'm responding in sections because of preference as it ensures I cover every point and how I show regard. It for to see.

Ihedinobi3:
I think that I should clarify that I only ever have a problem with people when they look at something straight in its face and still deny what it says. I find that very hard to excuse, especially when it affects the well-being of other believers. This is the only thing that occasions my "getting" any type of way when, as you say, we delve.

I find it very easy to excuse "people when they look at something straight in its face and still deny what it says". To begin with, how certain am I that me myself is not the one looking a thing straight in the face but not seeing what it says and they are right and I am wrong? There after all are a lot of things - my preconceived opinions, my assumptions, my ignorance, my stupidity, stubbornness, thinking I see when I really don't etc - that might be blinding me. So I check my own eyes in case I might be the dunce.

Then it might be a case where people eyes might not be working as well as mine, say no Jesusspatonmud has been rubbed in their eye so they can't see. Why would I not find it in my love my neighbour heart to excuse such people! Did I not with my own hands kill a whole Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of my own transgressions and do I pray not that my Father in heaven forgive me according to the exact measure to which I forgive those who transgress against me? I got a forest in my own eyes, ihe, so twigs in the eyes of others I'm blind to pretty much.

I believe the well-being of other believers is enhanced when they open their eyes and look. So you Ihe, are the protector, and buda is like the destroyer of the beliefs people hold on to because they've looked things straight in its face and seen things for what things are refuse to reconsider.

Ihedinobi3:
I am fine with disagreement, even if I prefer agreement. If an atheist told me straight out that he doesn't agree with something I say, I may ask why just for the record, but only for the record. Everyone has the right to believe whatever they please. What I take exception to is anyone making it a sort of duty to either confuse or deceive others all because they prefer a point of view and will not allow anything to even suggest that it may be wrong.

I don't mind disagreement myself, after all, I make no claim of a standard everyone must adopt. I state my opinion though. And since this is a forum, what else we going to do but argue, and by effect learn from one another, though I see how learning might not apply to those who've already seen things for what they are. But then, they can have mercy on we poor and teach, can't they, instead of taking exceptions! I do make two demands though fuzzy pot that I am. Bring an a-game please. And, we don't insult buda.

Ihedinobi3:
To explain, I have a personal rule of thumb to never try to "evangelize" an atheist. I get that such a person has made a choice, and typically doesn't want to hear anything about the Gospel, so I won't make the offer. So, I don't start threads attacking atheism or atheists, and I don't start threads to "preach the Gospel". My threads are specific to Christians, and even so, I take pains to make them unobtrusive but also as accessible as possible to everyone. When I join a conversation, it is always to answer a question directed at the Bible or at Christians, or else it is to protect other believers from attacks made on their faith. This is what brings me into contact with atheists. Otherwise, we would probably never discuss with each other.

I don't see atheist or Christians, myself. I just see Ihedinobi3, Martinez39, every individual person, instead of putting people in a box. When I put them in a box I find I've predetermined what and who they are and by golly did my crystal ball not arrive from China cracked. I'm never right when I assume so I try really really hard not to.

When I join a conversation, it's like I've been welcomed into someone's into their house and into their mind. I don't go looking around to see where to fill it with my stuff, no! I look around your house, see how you've made it to suit you, treat it with respect like it was my own mind, unless its some dirty persons house, then I just stay at the door and look in through the window if at all. I don't expect people to have furnished their mind like I have mine I guess.

Ihedinobi3:
The trouble begins when the atheist who posts a challenge to the Bible or Christians suddenly finds that there is a reasonable answer to that challenge for which they are not prepared. That is when the effort to prove the absurdity of Christianity goes awry and the atheist begins to use tactics that make me increasingly antagonistic toward them because I know what effect those tactics can have on a weak believer.

What? A common atheist makes your antagonistic increase, ihe? How does that happen? Imagine if you were up on a mountain and it was a devil tempting you and you were getting antagonistic?

Me? I love those who do their tactics. You see, its a forum. They are doing their tactics in public where others see it and where they too will return and see their own tactics and read other peoples comments about the tactics they were doing, and sometimes, its like spat on mud has been rubbed in their eye and they see themselves in a mirror.

I guess I leave the "weak believers" for the Lord to strengthen though, after all, it's not like buda is the messiah!

Ihedinobi3:
I am willing to believe that you, for example, may not really intend to cause harm with your actions when we discuss, not least because I have a desire to accommodate everyone, if perchance I may save some, but I do not pretend that things are not what they seem only because I wish that they weren't. This is why I am answering you now: to give you the benefit of the doubt in the hope that I judged you wrong earlier.

You did not judge wrong, ihe. buda is, 'Grace of God' one moment, next its, 'God is being an ass', so I'd very strongly advise you not to believe anything about buda. But thanks for the benefit of your doubt.

Ihedinobi3:
Perhaps, you will receive this post as an insult or something along the same lines, but I hope that you don't. I do wish that you and I and others besides could talk "religious-speak" comfortably and encourage one another to please the Lord Jesus Christ in all things. That is partly what I hope for in these conversations, but I realize that it is a choice I cannot make for other people, so my primary duty is to protect those who have made the choice in the first place. This may mean that if you have no use for the Lord Jesus and His Truth, you and I will always run the risk of "get[ting that way] when [you] delve".

Above where I said one of my demands is "we don't insult buda" what I didn't tell you is, I got firewall so even if buda is insulted the insultation does not get to buda, and if it ever does, buda just turns the other cheek. Otherwise, what's the point of having a use for the Lord".

You have actually honoured me ihe by helping me understand and I really really appreciate that even if we never agree. I think our main difference is, you are the comforter and the encourager, and buda is whipping lazy ass folks so they think. That which is Godly will always prevail.

budaatum:

You too. I'm responding in sections because of preference as it ensures I cover every point and how I show regard. It for to see.


I find it very easy to excuse "people when they look at something straight in its face and still deny what it says". To begin with, how certain am I that me myself is not the one looking a thing straight in the face but not seeing what it says and they are right and I am wrong? There after all are a lot of things - my preconceived opinions, my assumptions, my ignorance, my stupidity, stubbornness, thinking I see when I really don't etc - that might be blinding me. So I check my own eyes in case I might be the dunce.

Then it might be a case where people eyes might not be working as well as mine, say no Jesusspatonmud has been rubbed in their eye so they can't see. Why would I not find it in my love my neighbour heart to excuse such people! Did I not with my own hands kill a whole Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of my own transgressions and do I pray not that my Father in heaven forgive me according to the exact measure to which I forgive those who transgress against me? I got a forest in my own eyes, ihe, so twigs in the eyes of others I'm blind to pretty much.

I believe the well-being of other believers is enhanced when they open their eyes and look. So you Ihe, are the protector, and buda is like the destroyer of the beliefs people hold on to because they've looked things straight in its face and seen things for what things are refuse to reconsider.


I don't mind disagreement myself, after all, I make no claim of a standard everyone must adopt. I state my opinion though. And since this is a forum, what else we going to do but argue, and by effect learn from one another, though I see how learning might not apply to those who've already seen things for what they are. But then, they can have mercy on we poor and teach, can't they, instead of taking exceptions! I do make two demands though fuzzy pot that I am. Bring an a-game please. And, we don't insult buda.


I don't see atheist or Christians, myself. I just see Ihedinobi3, Martinez39, every individual person, instead of putting people in a box. When I put them in a box I find I've predetermined what and who they are and by golly did my crystal ball not arrive from China cracked. I'm never right when I assume so I try really really hard not to.

When I join a conversation, it's like I've been welcomed into someone's into their house and into their mind. I don't go looking around to see where to fill it with my stuff, no! I look around your house, see how you've made it to suit you, treat it with respect like it was my own mind, unless its some dirty persons house, then I just stay at the door and look in through the window if at all. I don't expect people to have furnished their mind like I have mine I guess.


What? A common atheist makes your antagonistic increase, ihe? How does that happen? Imagine if you were up on a mountain and it was a devil tempting you and you were getting antagonistic?

Me? I love those who do their tactics. You see, its a forum. They are doing their tactics in public where others see it and where they too will return and see their own tactics and read other peoples comments about the tactics they were doing, and sometimes, its like spat on mud has been rubbed in their eye and they see themselves in a mirror.

I guess I leave the "weak believers" for the Lord to strengthen though, after all, it's not like buda is the messiah!


You did not judge wrong, ihe. buda is, 'Grace of God' one moment, next its, 'God is being an ass', so I'd very strongly advise you not to believe anything about buda. But thanks for the benefit of your doubt.


Above where I said one of my demands is "we don't insult buda" what I didn't tell you is, I got firewall so even if buda is insulted the insultation does not get to buda, and if it ever does, buda just turns the other cheek. Otherwise, what's the point of having a use for the Lord".

You have actually honoured me ihe by helping me understand and I really really appreciate that even if we never agree. I think our main difference is, you are the comforter and the encourager, and buda is whipping lazy ass folks so they think. That which is Godly will always prevail.

Very well then. As long as we both know where we each stand.

Ihedinobi3:

Very well then. As long as we both know where we each stand.

I'm not having that, ihe. You way smarter than that and I can't stop learning. When you look with Jesusglasses you'd see we being friends, you and I. Lovers, even. That's the Jesus stand that made you reach out which is appreciated.

Why isn't there an I love you emoji on here in fact!

Anyone this Christ own up now o!

CAPSLOCKED:
IF YOU HAVE A MINUTE TO SPARE, THINK ABOUT ALL THE UNDER 5YR OLDS AND LITTLE BABIES WHO WILL DIE AND GO TO HELL BECAUSE THEY INHERITED ADAM AND EVE'S SIN. UNLESS THEY'RE BAPTIZED.
AND EVEN AFTER BAPTISM IF THEY TAKE BISCUITS THAT IS NOT THEIRS AND TELL LIES THEY BECOME CANDIDATES OF HELL. LITTLE KIDS.
CHRISTIANITY CRAZY!

Who's "Christianity" is this Caps? Show me!