PDA

View Full Version : Who Sinned?



JohnDB
Mar 27th 2010, 03:20 PM
I am going to address this once...and not again.

And mostly for the sanity of those who don't wish to engage in the debate which seems to be ever so prevalent on our board lately.

In the story of "the man born blind"...Jesus heals a man who was blind from birth.

Now...most of the time this story gets no notice....no one ever forms a sermon around it so that the parishioners can parrot the lesson later...and this is for a reason.

The Jews of Jesus' day often debated higher theologies much along the same lines as people do on this forum.

If someone was to pay close attention to the dialog between Jesus and the disciples they might see that the conversation doesn't make a whole lot of sense with a simple flat reading. Unless the whole back drop of understanding of the common debate was known.

The Jews of that time debated the question of the "effect of sin" upon mankind. But this debate went much farther than the title would suggest.

They wondered why God chose to bless them with the genetics of being Jewish to begin with. Why were other apparently good people not blessed with the genetic line. Why were some Israelites born with such maladies (such as blindness) at birth. Was the effect of sin more corporate in nature or more specific...did someone in his past sin specifically to cause this man to be born blind or was it because of the sin of all of israel that this man was born blind.

And then there was the Gentile Adoption issue. Some Gentiles were adopted into Israel and believers in God. Caleb in the Old Testament is a classic example. Why and how could these men choose to become believers when the vast majority of people on the Earth did not agree that God is so good...and did not want to become Israelites as well.

Some were sure that effect of sin was individualistic in nature...It would always affect your legacy. And there was plenty of scripture to back that side up...
And then some were noticing the free will of mankind and noticing that individuals like Caleb were vastly different from their predecessors and chose something else. This side too had plenty of common sense and scripture to back it up.

Look carefully again at what Jesus says. "No one sinned"

Meaning: Neither side of this debate is correct. Neither has it right. Neither answer or question is posed correctly to begin with.

When debating this issue people forget one of God's main attributes. It is one of those basic and most important lessons that we shouldn't forget.

God is omnipotent. God is omniscient. These two things together mean that God is always perfectly efficient in his use of power...there is no side effect of giving someone their life that is not intended...no power is ever wasted. Otherwise God is not omnipotent or omniscient. (God gives and creates all life)

All people have a purpose and function...no life is ever wasted. All give glory to God in some fashion or manner. Some for noble and some for ignoble purposes. All are vessels. Even the most heathen amongst us has a special purpose that God has designed...no better and no worse than we are.

So....for those that like the debate and wish to carry on debating it...that can very well be described as an ignoble purpose. But carry on if you feel you must.

Firstfruits
Mar 27th 2010, 03:45 PM
Sin, according to Jesus, did not cause him to be born blind.

Jn 9:2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?

There are some that believe that because you are sick that it is because of sin.

Firstfruits

Freek
Mar 27th 2010, 03:51 PM
He must have kicked his mom to hard while she was pregnant. :D No this man was born to a fallen human race. That is why he was born blind.

Firstfruits
Mar 27th 2010, 03:58 PM
He must have kicked his mom to hard while she was pregnant. :D No this man was born to a fallen human race. That is why he was born blind.

What then about those born without defect yet are most wicked?

Firstfruits

Freek
Mar 27th 2010, 04:04 PM
What then about those born without defect yet are most wicked?

Firstfruits

They also die eventually.

Firstfruits
Mar 27th 2010, 04:08 PM
They also die eventually.

But we are all born in sin, so does that not also apply to us?

Firstfruits

Freek
Mar 27th 2010, 04:14 PM
But we are all born in sin, so does that not also apply to us?

Firstfruits

Of course it applies to us. We also die. (Do I understand what you are saying?) Does the Bible say that we are all born equal with our first birth? The second birth is another matter altogether.

Firstfruits
Mar 27th 2010, 04:27 PM
Of course it applies to us. We also die. (Do I understand what you are saying?) Does the Bible say that we are all born equal with our first birth? The second birth is another matter altogether.

With regards to the blind man, do you believe that it is because of sin that he was born blind and if so why?

Firstfruits

Freek
Mar 27th 2010, 04:33 PM
With regards to the blind man, do you believe that it is because of sin that he was born blind and if so why?

Firstfruits

He nor his parents committed a specific sin that had to be "punished". He was born to a fallen human race and yes, that is caused by sin. Can satan be redeemed?

Firstfruits
Mar 27th 2010, 04:43 PM
He nor his parents committed a specific sin that had to be "punished". He was born to a fallen human race and yes, that is caused by sin. Can satan be redeemed?

Knowing that we are all born in sin, why are we not all born with defects?

Firstfruits

JohnDB
Mar 27th 2010, 04:45 PM
:giveup::B:B:B

arrrrgggghhhhh

Kahtar
Mar 27th 2010, 05:37 PM
:giveup::B:B:B

arrrrgggghhhhhHmm. You tell everyone that if they wish to debate, to go ahead and do so. So they are, and because they are, you are 'giving up'? What was your point or purpose in this thread?

JohnDB
Mar 27th 2010, 05:59 PM
Hmm. You tell everyone that if they wish to debate, to go ahead and do so. So they are, and because they are, you are 'giving up'? What was your point or purpose in this thread?

The particular debate I was speaking to by exegeting the scripture was about to be again become debated on this particular thread...when the focus is against that particular debate.

Those in the beginning stages of debating it were taking exactly the two sides that Jesus said were wrong to begin with.

Slug1
Mar 27th 2010, 06:12 PM
So....for those that like the debate and wish to carry on debating it...that can very well be described as an ignoble purpose. But carry on if you feel you must.Personally I feel the scripture explains the purpose of how Jesus opens the eyes (spiritual) of those who are obedient to Him so they see "Him" and stop just hearing and knowing about Him.

holyrokker
Mar 27th 2010, 07:45 PM
Knowing that we are all born in sin, why are we not all born with defects?

FirstfruitsThis is because we are NOT born in sin.

As to the man born blind, "Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life."

notuptome
Mar 27th 2010, 08:17 PM
The natural man cannot understand spiritual matters. A natural man sees children born with imperfections and questions Gods love. Natural man cannot comprehend how a loving God could allow children to be born deformed or to die at or shortly after birth. The spiritual man submits to Gods perfect wisdom and trusts that God will have His glory in the life of the child that others consider to be of lesser value. Much the same as natural men judge the value of their fellow men on outward appearances and not on inner value as it relates to God. Those who have much are expected to produce much. Those to whom little is given are expected to produce little. God has said that His strength is perfected in weakness and it is He that gives the increase even to one hundred fold or more.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Freek
Mar 27th 2010, 08:38 PM
This is because we are NOT born in sin.



Why do/did we need a redeemer then?

holyrokker
Mar 27th 2010, 09:33 PM
Why do/did we need a redeemer then?

Because we have all sinned. We have each gone astray.

But the point that Jesus was making is that this man's blindness had nothing to do with sin. It had EVERYTHING to do with what Jesus was going to do.

Freek
Mar 27th 2010, 10:28 PM
Because we have all sinned. We have each gone astray.

Now why would we do that?

holyrokker
Mar 27th 2010, 10:41 PM
Now why would we do that?
I think it would be more appropriate to talk about it in another thread: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?204067-Are-we-born-with-sin

LookingUp
Mar 27th 2010, 11:33 PM
I am going to address this once...and not again...In the original Greek, Jesus does not say, “he was born blind so that…”. Jesus simply says, “let the works of God be revealed in him.” The phrase “he was born blind so that…” was put in by the translators because it is assumed that Jesus continued to answer their question with more than, “It was neither this man nor his parents.” So, if we stick with the original Greek, it would read more like, “And His disciples asked Him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?’ Jesus answered, ‘It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; let the works of God be revealed in him! We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work.’” (John 9:2-4). Jesus told them that neither had sinned to bring on this blindness and then turned their focus to what was really important. “And now let’s get to work, time is short!—let us see the works of God revealed in this man!”

JohnDB
Mar 28th 2010, 12:15 AM
So...

If I am understanding what you are saying..

What you are saying is that Jesus didn't want to engage in this "higher theology" debate, thought it a waste of time...and was more concerned with actually doing something constructive...

And to that...I would agree to as well.

holyrokker
Mar 28th 2010, 01:11 AM
So...

If I am understanding what you are saying..

What you are saying is that Jesus didn't want to engage in this "higher theology" debate, thought it a waste of time...and was more concerned with actually doing something constructive...

And to that...I would agree to as well.
I also agree with that.
In chapter 20 of the same gospel, John tells us: "Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name."

I see this as being the "theme" of John's account. All that Jesus said and did was for the glory of the Father.

LookingUp
Mar 28th 2010, 05:39 AM
So...

If I am understanding what you are saying..

What you are saying is that Jesus didn't want to engage in this "higher theology" debate, thought it a waste of time...and was more concerned with actually doing something constructive...

And to that...I would agree to as well.:thumbsup:
Let the works of God be revealed!

Firstfruits
Mar 28th 2010, 09:12 AM
This is because we are NOT born in sin.

As to the man born blind, "Neither this man nor his parents sinned," said Jesus, "but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life."

How then would you explain the following scripture?

Ps 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Firstfruits

holyrokker
Mar 28th 2010, 03:26 PM
How then would you explain the following scripture?

Ps 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Firstfruits
There's a thread here to discuss this passage: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?180563-People-are-not-born-sinful

Firstfruits
Mar 28th 2010, 08:47 PM
There's a thread here to discuss this passage: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?180563-People-are-not-born-sinful

Thanks for the link, however I do not believe it agress with the following.

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Firstfruits

holyrokker
Mar 28th 2010, 09:40 PM
Thanks for the link, however I do not believe it agress with the following.

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Firstfruits
That's not the topic of this thread.
I'll be glad to discuss it here> http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?180563-People-are-not-born-sinful

Firstfruits
Mar 29th 2010, 11:12 AM
That's not the topic of this thread.
I'll be glad to discuss it here> http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php?180563-People-are-not-born-sinful

May I ask how wether or not a man is born in sin is not relevant to this thread?

Firstfruits

Sherry W
Mar 29th 2010, 02:24 PM
I have read that the fact the disciples even asked the question “Who sinned, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?” (emphasis mine) showed that the they believed it was possible to sin before birth, in a previous life, because they knew he was born that way when they asked. In there mind it was one of two possible reasons. They knew he was born that way when they asked. Jesus did not rebuke them for believing in that possibility, but simply stated that sin was not the reason for his blindness, but to show God's power.

ThyWordIsTruth
Mar 29th 2010, 02:40 PM
What I found amusing was that Peter's question had a flaw. He asked who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind? How could his blindness be due to his own sin, if he was *born* blind? What sin could he have prior to being born?

Yes the Jews of that century believed that you're sick or you're poor because you have sin in your life, I can't totally blame them because those are some of the curses named when the Law was giving. It's quite easy to fall into that way of thinking. This goes on even today in some circles of Christianity, believe it or not.

I think what this Scripture was trying to teach us was that not everything centres around us. It is also teaching that God is sovereign (imagine what that man had to suffer for all his life, for this one moment) and we sometimes have to go through tough circumstances because someone else will benefit from it and it's all in God's plan.

I think it also teaches us not to judge other people's spiritual condition based on things like status, wealth and their physical well-being.

BTW, this guy is one of my favourite characters in the Bible. I just love his guts and how he answers back to the Sanhedrin. It really made me laugh. I'd love to meet him in heaven.

Sherry W
Mar 29th 2010, 02:52 PM
What I found amusing was that Peter's question had a flaw. He asked who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind? How could his blindness be due to his own sin, if he was *born* blind? What sin could he have prior to being born?

As indicated in my previous post, some might believe he blinded someone (literally) or turned a "blind eye" towards someone less forunate, in a previous life, so Peter thought that was one possibilty.

BroRog
Mar 29th 2010, 05:07 PM
I have read that the fact the disciples even asked the question “Who sinned, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?” (emphasis mine) showed that the they believed it was possible to sin before birth, in a previous life, because they knew he was born that way when they asked. In there mind it was one of two possible reasons. They knew he was born that way when they asked. Jesus did not rebuke them for believing in that possibility, but simply stated that sin was not the reason for his blindness, but to show God's power.Hi Sherry, I believe we can read this statement another way. Remove the second comma and it reads a little differently.

And His disciples asked Him, "Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents that he would be born blind?"

The way I hear it, the disciples have left out of their question the conventional assumption that had the man sinned himself, he would have become blind after birth. To word it another way, they seem to be asking "Why is this man blind? Did he do it to himself or was it done to him by his parents?" I don't think it was a question of prenatal sin, which I can't imagine what that would look like.

LookingUp
Mar 29th 2010, 05:25 PM
I have read that the fact the disciples even asked the question “Who sinned, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?” (emphasis mine) showed that the they believed it was possible to sin before birth, in a previous life, because they knew he was born that way when they asked. In there mind it was one of two possible reasons. They knew he was born that way when they asked. Jesus did not rebuke them for believing in that possibility, but simply stated that sin was not the reason for his blindness, but to show God's power.I don’t think “in a previous life” is biblical. If it were, I imagine we’d see the teaching of it in the OT or the NT. I would agree that it appears they believed it was possible for one’s sins (or one’s parents) to cause blindness. We don’t have to assume the man sinned in a previous life; let’s face it, everyone who breathes eventually sins. Also, they could have believed it was possible for the fetus to somehow sin in its mother’s womb (he kicked her too hard? LOL).

LookingUp
Mar 29th 2010, 05:30 PM
...It is also teaching that God is sovereign (imagine what that man had to suffer for all his life, for this one moment) and we sometimes have to go through tough circumstances because someone else will benefit from it and it's all in God's plan...Hello there! Have you considered the following. In the original Greek, Jesus does not say, “he was born blind so that…”. Jesus simply says, “let the works of God be revealed in him.” The phrase “he was born blind so that…” was put in by the translators because it is assumed that Jesus continued to answer their question with more than, “It was neither this man nor his parents.” So, if we stick with the original Greek, it would read more like, “And His disciples asked Him, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?’ Jesus answered, ‘It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; let the works of God be revealed in him! We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work.’” (John 9:2-4). Jesus told them that neither had sinned to bring on this blindness and then turned their focus to what was really important. “And now let’s get to work, time is short!—let us see the works of God revealed in this man!”

JohnDB
Mar 31st 2010, 12:49 AM
What I found amusing was that Peter's question had a flaw. He asked who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind? How could his blindness be due to his own sin, if he was *born* blind? What sin could he have prior to being born?

Yes the Jews of that century believed that you're sick or you're poor because you have sin in your life, I can't totally blame them because those are some of the curses named when the Law was giving. It's quite easy to fall into that way of thinking. This goes on even today in some circles of Christianity, believe it or not.

I think what this Scripture was trying to teach us was that not everything centres around us. It is also teaching that God is sovereign (imagine what that man had to suffer for all his life, for this one moment) and we sometimes have to go through tough circumstances because someone else will benefit from it and it's all in God's plan.

I think it also teaches us not to judge other people's spiritual condition based on things like status, wealth and their physical well-being.

BTW, this guy is one of my favourite characters in the Bible. I just love his guts and how he answers back to the Sanhedrin. It really made me laugh. I'd love to meet him in heaven.

The question is one of "higher Theology" as was commonly discussed in the BethMidrash (post primary schooling)

The opening post on this thread shows this in detail.