Psalms 51: 5 Commentary

Post #21, Charles: This is too exciting. I need to leave town right now for 2-3 hours, but will be back tonight, at which time I’ll get back to you, bro.

By T.Snow (wrote 286 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/16/2011 21:31 pm

T Snow, you started Post 20 by saying, “some of us are going through the Bible, pulling out verses attempting to prove a point[s], disregarding the context OF those verses”. Can’t agree more! It’s exactly what you’re doing. Here are three examples:

1. You said “When man disobeyed God in Genesis 3, the FIRST result was SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS - they realized they were naked [3:7]. Man was then banished from his paradise [3:23]. That wonderful “fellowship” man had with the God of the Universe was lost - mankind died – spiritually To note,Jesus came and went to the Cross to RESTORE all that was lost through man’s disobedience, most importantly, his relationship with God [Lk.19:10].”

Let’s look at your Lk 19:10 quotation: “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.” Tell me, is there any reference to Adam and Eve here? Read it again. Read it in its context. Read the entire chapter if you will. There is absolutely NOTHING that ties this to Adam and Eve’s sin. Jesus never, absolutely NEVER talks about this subject. You are pulling verses attempting to prove a point, disregarding the context of those verses, just like you said.

2. 2nd example: “This is what Paul is talking about in Romans 5:12 - the fact that “sin” [rebellion against God] lives in every one of us, is EVIDENT [plainly seen] in our words and actions. We mentioned earlier, that when man sinned, he died spiritually. But it also means we die physically. SIN in the world is why we all grow old and die. If man had obeyed God in Eden, this wouldn’t have happened. Man would have lived forever.”

First of all, you need to understand the difference between the original sin and the sins we commit. The original sin is the one that Adam and Eve made and that some people believe we are all born with (a very ridiculous belief, in my mind). The sins we commit are on the other hand our own, i.e. we actually CHOSE to make them. When you CHOOSE to do something you are free to do or not do it. Therefore by definition it is possible for someone to never commit a sin in his life. Difficult, yes. Improbable, yes. But possible. If it weren’t possible then it would not be true that God gave us the freedom to sin, because with the freedom to sin there implicitly is the freedom not to sin - otherwise it wouln’t be freedom. We do not HAVE to sin. YOUR “FACT” IS NOT A FACT.

Also I could not but chuckle at your assertion that without sin nobody would have died physically. Can you imagine all those billions of people living on this tiny planet? Or would we be all still in the garden? Funny!

3. Finally, “And Ezekiel 18:20 does not contradict Romans 5:12. What the prophet is saying is, the son will not be held accountable for his father’s sins, nor the father the sins of his son. People who live righteously will be rewardes so; and people who live wickedly will be held accountable. Eze.18:20 and Rom.5:12 are in accord” Well, are you listening to yourself? If the son will not be held accountable to his father’s sin then we are not accountable to Adam’s sin - a clear contradiction of Romans 5:12.

Just keeping you honest

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/16/2011 15:42 pm

What is happening here is, some of us are going through the Bible, pulling out verses attempting to prove a point[s], disregarding the context OF those verses. Interpreting Scripture this way will ALWAYS lead to misunderstanding the Bible, and thus the heart of God. Watch..
“According to Romans 5:12, every baby is born with the sin of someone else.” The way Romans 5:12 is being used here, shows a misunderstanding of the “sin” principle. Bear with me a few … please read with the intent to understand… Paul writes:
“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin; and in this way death came to all men because all sinned.”
Look - “…just as sin ENTERED THE WORLD THROUGH ONE MAN…” - before Adam disobeyed God, life was good - paradise. Adam and his wife were naked with no shame [Gen.2:25]. More importantly, man walked and talked with the God of the Universe.
When man disobeyed God in Genesis 3, the FIRST result was SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS - they realized they were naked [3:7]. Man was then banished from his paradise [3:23]. That wonderful “fellowship” man had with the God of the Universe was lost - mankind died - spiritually
To note, Jesus came and went to the Cross to RESTORE all that was lost through man’s disobedience, most importantly, his relationship with God [Lk.19:10].
And then look - “…and death through sin…” - from Genesis 1, we know that all God had created [plants, animals, etc.] was “good.” Everything God created was good. The Bible doesn’t tell us that when God created mankind, he was good. But it was man’s disobedience that brought the death penalty on the rest of the human race … why?
“…and IN THIS WAY death came to all men [mankind] because all sinned.” This is the “sin principle.” It is a fact which cannot be denied, that mankind [all of us] are sinners - a fact that existed long before the apostle Paul came around. People have been sinning ever since the Garden of Eden. Look around, read the newspaper. We are all sinners through and through, Christian or not.
Why is that? From Genesis 2:25, we saw that man, in the beginning, was naked and not concerned about it. But when he [had] REALIZED his nakedness, he became SELF-CONSCIOUS. From that realization came self-indulgence, sensual pleasure - all those behaviors and attitudes we read in Gal.5:19-21, which, we will add, existed long before Paul. I think these are “blanket-terms” for many sins, or acts of rebellion against God.
This is what Paul is talking about in Romans 5:12 - the fact that “sin” [rebellion against God] lives in every one of us, is EVIDENT [plainly seen] in our words and actions.
We mentioned earlier, that when man sinned, he died spiritually. But it also means we die physically. SIN in the world is why we all grow old and die. If man had obeyed God in Eden, this wouldn’t have happened. Man would have lived forever.
And Ezekiel 18:20 does not contradict Romans 5:12. What the prophet is saying is, the son will not be held accountable for his father’s sins, nor the father the sins of his son. People who live righteously will be rewardes so; and people who live wickedly will be held accountable.
Eze.18:20 and Rom.5:12 are in accord.

By T.Snow (wrote 286 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/16/2011 05:55 am

Charles (Post #18): The passages you quoted do not contradict Rom. 5:12. I will post some commentary under each of those verses sometime soon.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/15/2011 16:54 pm

Roland, you say that Romans 5:12 is the truth, but Romans 5:12 contradicts several other passages of the Bible.

According to Romans 5:12, every baby is born with the sin of someone else: “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.”

But Ezekiel 18:20 is in complete contradiction: “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.”

Paul even contradicts himself in 2Cor 5:21: “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” You interpreted this verse as follows: “This verse says Jesus Christ ‘knew no sin.’ He entered the world a perfect creature.” In other words Paul insists that every baby is born with sin and then he says that baby Jesus wasn’t.

Paul also contradicts Jesus. While Paul insists that every child is sinful and denied the kingdom of heaven unless redeemed, Jesus tells us that to enter the kingdom of heaven we must be like little children: “And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt 18:3).

So, who’s telling the truth? Paul or Ezekiel? Paul in Romans or Paul in 2Cor? Paul or Jesus?

Just keeping you honest 

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/15/2011 11:05 am

Charles (Post #15): In my post #16 I suggested you may want to read Romans 5:12, but I see that you already have. You did not like the truth stated so you accused Paul of making up his own religion and discounted the verse. Paul wrote thirteen, possible fourteen books of the Holy Bible. You may as well discount the books that have verses that do not jive with your beliefs.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/15/2011 02:16 am

Charles (Post #15): You may want to read Romans 5:12.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/15/2011 02:12 am

Reading through this thread one can see how a statement can mean various things to different people. Some, like Apollos6640 (Post 11) think that David was NOT born with sin. Apollos quotes various translations to make his point. He also invokes two powerful verses from Ezekiel and Matthew that go against the sinful birth notion. These quotations as well as his analogy of the drunken dad are spot on. I totally agree with what he said.

Others like Alex (Post 4) think exactly the opposite. Alex actually goes farther than to just say that David was born with sin. He says of David: “He did not become a sinner by committing a sin. He was a sinner by birth and so he committed a sin. He was in need of forgiveness of sins.” Frankly I find this ludicrous. Can one be a singer without singing? Actor without acting? Preacher without preaching. Of course not! And likewise one cannot be a sinner without sinning. And as far as being in need of forgiveness let me remind Alex what Jesus taught us. Jesus taught us to pray for forgiveness of our trespasses, i.e. sins we actually committed. He didn’t say he would forgive us sins we did not commit.

Staying with Post 4, Alex quotes both Romans 5:12, which says that through one man we all have sinned, and 2Cor 5:21, which says that Jesus knew no sin. These two verses contradict each other. If Jesus was a man (had the seed of a woman – another quotation of Alex’s in Post 4) and if every baby is born with sin (Romans 5:12), then Jesus was born with sin just like any other baby. You can’t have it both ways.

Also, why is Paul brought into this argument? Paul teaches that we all are born with sin, but David here is speaking only of himself. This verse has nothing to do with the sinful birth theory that Paul came up with. This is only about David.

Clearly something is troubling David in this verse. Something that has to do with his conception. In Post 1 rey jumps into the conclusion that his mother must have been an adulterer. We don’t have enough facts to draw this conclusion, however, if I was a poet trying to explain that I was born out of wedlock, I would not have chosen a better verse.

I think the most unqualified interpretation of this verse was made by Roland G in Post 6: “In reality, each member of humankind also picks up or receives a nature to sin at the moment their mother becomes pregnant.” Excuse me, Roland, but did you say “in reality”!?! This is science fiction; something that has yet to be mapped in the human genome! Please don’t make sweeping assertions like this without any hope of backing them up.

Let me point out a couple of statements that I DO agree with. In Post 13 Todd said, “Adam and Eve were created, not righteous, but innocent.” Same as all babies, I would say. And in Post 14 Roland G says, “Some people claim a person is born only with a sinful nature, but become sinners only when they knowingly commit sin.” I am one of those people - well, the sinful nature we are supposedly born with is only a conjecture, but the second part of the statement is absolutely correct. Truly now, how can one sin without sinning?!?

In conclusion, this verse has nothing to do with Paul’s sinful birth theory. It is about a humbled David who seems to be saying that his birth was not righteous and because of that he considered himself a sinner. But, if you ask me, he wasn’t.

By Charles (wrote 1421 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/15/2011 01:32 am

David acknowledges he was brought forth from the womb “in iniquity,” that is, as a sinner because of an inherited perverse, depraved, and fallen, nature imputed at birth. Some people claim a person is born only with a sinful nature, but become sinners only when they knowingly commit sin. But, “a sinner” refers both to someone with a fallen nature as a result of a judicial imputation or to someone who commits sin.

David also acknowledges he was “in sin,” that is, spiritually dead, at the moment his mother became pregnant. Indeed, the penalty for coming into this world with a fallen nature is a shortened physical life and immediate spiritual death at the moment of conception.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 7/1/2011 01:09 am

Adam and Eve were created,not righteous,but innocent.They knew nothing of “good” nor “evil.” Further,they were naked and felt no shame [Gen.2:25].So before the Fall, man[kind] was not concerned about himself.
Once they had eaten the [forbidden] fruit,”And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked;and they sewed fig leaves together,and made aprons” [Gen.3:7].
And so the first result of the Fall was self-consciousness/awareness [self-importance,pride].Ever since mankind’s Fall in Eden,right up to the present,he has been self-absorbed.Look at the fashion world,for example.
It has been said,”We are not sinners because we sin … we sin because we are sinners.”
The human race was judged and condemned way back in Eden.And so Jesus went to the Cross,paying the penalty of THAT [first] act of disobedience - through which came judgment to all [Rom.5:12,18-19].
We make a distinction between “sins” and “sin.” Sins are the acts of disobedience we commit due to our inclination/tendency to do so. Sin is the inclination/tendency.And David is talking about that inclination/tendency we all have within us through inheritance.
We are all born with the nature of a sinner,which is manifested in our first act of [conscious] disobedience [Jas.4:17].
Finally,Adam’s sin in Eden brought judgment [death] to all.Regardless of how many “sins’ we commit or how ugly they may be,the penalty is the same.Jesus went to the Cross,paying THAT penalty.And so it has been paid for the whole world.Anyone who believes this truth and receives Jesus as Savior,will never be condemned [Rom.8:1-2;Col.2:13-15].

By Todd (wrote 286 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/30/2011 08:03 am

Apollos 6640 (Post #11): Psalms 51:5 has reference to David’s being born. Therefore, the text . . . does not talk about his state at birth.”

You need to go beyond the word “shapen.”

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/30/2011 04:53 am

The Meaning of Psalms 51:5

Let us first spend some time looking at the verse itself. It reads in the KJV, “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.”

The word “shapen” means “be brought forth” (Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Lexicon, p. 297). It appears in the following verses:

“Art thou the first man that was born? or wast thou made before the hills?”
(Job 15:7) “When there was no depths, I was brought forth; when there were no fountains abounding with water.” (Prov. 8:24) “Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth.” (Prov. 8:25)

Clearly, “shapen” in Psalms 51:5 has reference to David’s being born. Therefore, the text simply refers to the situation surrounding his conception and actual birth. It does not talk about his state at birth. To illustrate this, one might say, “In drunkenness did my father beat me.” This would not make the beaten person drunk; it simply describes the situation wherein he was beaten. Similarly, David’s being conceived and brought forth in sin did not make him a sinner. Because of the danger of this verse’s being mistranslated, as in the case of the NIV, let us notice how it is rendered in some popular versions of various countries. Please notice the following:

KJV: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.”

ASV: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity; And in sin did my mother conceive me.”

NASV: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.”

NKJV: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.”

Revised Elberfeld Translation (German): “See, in guilt was I born, and in sin had my mother conceived me.”

Zurich Bible (Swiss): “See, in guilt was I born, and in sins had my mother me conceived.”

Please notice that in all these translations, David never says he was born “with” sin. That sinful actions surrounded his birth is clearly taught; that sin was passed on to him from his mother is not.

How will Psalm 51:5 best conform to the clear teaching of the Bible in other places? This is a material question whenever one is trying to understand the teaching of a given text. If one were to take the verse to say that one is born with sin on his soul it would contradict the following verses:

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. (Ezek. 18:20)

But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven. (Matt. 19:14, my emph, sw)

On the other hand, if we understand Psalms 51:5 to teach that one is born innocent, in spite of the events surrounding their birth, it harmonizes with the above verses.

Most English-speaking brethren are aware of the weaknesses of various translations in their native tongue and have learned to deal with them. Likewise, we can deal with such problems in other languages. (In Lithuania, where Russian is understood, they use the Russian Synodal Version to show the proper rendering of Psalms 51:5.) Let us be aware of the dangers of possible errors in translations and be zealous to give proper explanation of God’s word.

By apollos6640 (wrote 15 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 6/30/2011 04:17 am

Ps.51:5 - If David had died at birth, I do not believe he would’ve ended up in hell. What I think David means is that He [as all of us], was born with the capacity or inclination to sin. So, as infants, we all have the sinful inclination but are not able, at that point, to choose TO sin. “Anyone, then, who knows the good he ought to do and doesn’t do it, sins” [Jas.4:17]. We will all be held accountable for what we know.

By T Snow (wrote 286 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 5/26/2011 08:11 am

Cleopas:
It is not if David was a sinner, David was a sinner as everyone of us is, whether believers or unbelievers we are all sinners; we all come short of the standard of God…

if he died stillborn, or as a baby would he go to hell? No matter who explains to you with all th supporting sc riptures as proofs of their doctrine and stand…you and all of us must remember that God has the last say whether anybody should be consigned to hell…it is His to decide not us even if we know all basis for consigning someone to hell…just remember God’s love & mercies is over His justice!

By TIUCHE (wrote 3265 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 5/12/2011 12:27 pm

If David was born a sinner. And died at birth. Was he in going to hell?

By Cleopas (wrote 67 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 5/12/2011 05:48 am

David realizes he picked up an unjustly received nature to sin at birth. David tells us the moment he received the nature to sin. He says this happened when his mother became pregnant. In reality, each member of humankind also picks up or receives a nature to sin at the moment their mother becomes pregnant.

By Roland G (wrote 1651 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 1/2/2011 18:35 pm

David’s mother might have been a godly person.But David was born as a sinner.
Children who are born to godly parents must also be born again.
Read John 3:3,5.”Except a man be born again…”.It applies to all who are born in this world.God’s word does not tell us that a person who is born in a religious family-say,to born again parents-need not be born again.
Read John 1:12,13.”..as many as received Him to them He gave power to become the sons of God….” “Which were born not of blood,nor of the will of the flesh,nor of the will of man,but of God.”

By Alex (wrote 499 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/29/2008 01:18 am

1)David’s father’s name was Jesse who had eight sons.1 Sam.16:10,11.The names of his seven sons are given in 1 Chr.2:12-15.David was the youngest of all.1Sam.16:11.
2)The name of the mother of David was not mentioned in the Bible.She must be a godly woman.David mentioned her as God’s handmaid in Psalms.”..and save the son of thine handmaid” Psalm 86:16.”..and the son of thine
handmaid.”Psalm 116:16.
3)In Romans 5:12,it is mentioned that”by one man sin entered into the world” and that “all have sinned.” In Romans 3:23,we read that”all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.”.In Romans 5:19,it is mentioned that “…as by one man’s disobedience,many were made sinners.”
4)An apple tree yields apple fruit.Even if we do not find apples in the tree,we call it an apple tree as it has the nature to yield apple fruit.Man has inherited the sinful nature from Adam.A man sins because he is born as a sinner.
5)David confessed that he has sinned because he was born as a sinner.He did not become a sinner by committing a sin.He was a sinner by birth and so he committed a sin.He was in need of forgiveness of sins.
6)Jesus Christ came forth out of the stem of Jesse.(David’s father.)Isaiah 11:1,10.He was the seed of David.(Acts 13:23;Luke 1:32;Romans 1:3).
The angel Gabriel told Mary,”…that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”Luke 1:35.
Jesus was made of the woman.Gal.4:4..He was the seed of the woman.Gen.3:15.
Joseph was his legal father but not his physical father.
“Jesus Christ is holy,harmless,undefiled,separate from sinners and made higher than the heavens.”Heb.7:26.He knew no sin.2 cor.5:21.He did no sin.1 Pet.2:22.”..in Him is no sin.”1 John 3:5.”..He had done no violence;neither was any deceit in His mouth.” Isaiah 53:9.
7)1 Tim.1:15 says,”..Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.”
“..He was manifested to take away our sins.” 1John 3:5.Read 1John1:29.
Jesus Christ is the Saviour of the world.Luke 2:11;John4:42;1 John4:14;Acts 13:23.”In whom(Jesus)we have redemption through his blood,the forgiveness of sins.Eph.1:7;Col.1:14.

By Alex (wrote 499 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/29/2008 00:09 am

Yeah, that’s a new one on me too Cam. I hope Rey won’t take it too hard. Maybe he was quoting someone else? Lord knows I’ve fouled up some things from the pulpit. I’ve put Moses on the ark, Jesus sweating as it were great drops of blood - in the Garden of Eden, and Paul on the road to Nebraska.

David isn’t saying that he was conceived out of wedlock or anything like that. Just that, when it comes to sin – we got it honest. He’s saying that he was born a sinner and that he naturally leans toward forbidden things.
He also realized that sin had to be IN him before it ever came FROM him. It’s hard to fathom that a newborn baby is sinful. But they must be – else they would not reap the wages of sin and die. Neither the tree nor the fruit of human nature is good. (It’s not just the water in the bucket that’s filthy but the whole well is polluted.)

Jaysun1980@hotmail.com

By Jason (wrote 321 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/28/2008 20:18 pm

Rey,

Your powers of imaginative interpretation astound me. I would love to know how you ever got to the silly idea that Psalm 51:5 is the voice of David’s unborn child speaking! I see you posted this commentary at 1:12am so I am willing to blame this truly dreadful exegesis on sheer exhaustion. I’m not sure how else you could justify such a blatant disregard for common sense and basic interpretive skills. I urge you, as a brother in Christ, to remove this commentary from the internet and presume not to be a teacher without at least some educational training in Biblical interpretation, for the consequences are severe (James 3:1).

By Cam (wrote 1 Bible Commentary - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 12/28/2008 09:34 am

This is much like in Psalm 2, where the speaker changes from God the Father to God the Son in verse 7 without announcement, and the speaker again changes unannounced in verse 10 from God the Son back to David. So also here, the speaking role changes from David to his unborn child in Bathsheba’s womb here in verse 5, who laments his adulterous conception “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Note how the guilt is not placed on the speaker, but on his mother. His mother sinned, not himself. His mother committed adultery. But seeing that the unborn child speaks to David from the womb by a miracle, why does he not condemn David to his face? He pursues a cautious course before the king, even as Nathan the prophet had done with his parable in 2nd Samuel 12:1-7. So also, as Nathan told a parable about a rich man who stole a poor man’s pet sheep rather than accuse David directly at first, so the unborn child pursues the course of condemning the actions of his mother, and thereby via extension of his father, David the king, as well. We will find in the next verse (6) that it is shown and verified the the speaker in verse 5 is indeed David’s unborn child.

By rey (wrote 36 Bible Commentaries - permalink to this Commentary)
Posted on: 9/9/2008 01:12 am