ORIGINAL SIN

[missmuffet]

On 5/14/2016 at 10:14 AM, enoob57 said:

Roman 5 clearly gives the teaching of original sin.

Enoob what do you think of this article? Too Calvinism?

Question: "What is original sin?"

Answer: The term “original sin” deals with Adam’s sin of disobedience in eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and its effects upon the rest of the human race. Original sin can be defined as “that sin and its guilt that we all possess in God’s eyes as a direct result of Adam’s sin in the Garden of Eden.” The doctrine of original sin focuses particularly on its effects on our nature and our standing before God, even before we are old enough to commit conscious sin. There are three main views that deal with that effect.

Pelagianism: This view says that Adam’s sin had no effect upon the souls of his descendants other than his sinful example influencing those who followed after him to also sin. According to this view, man has the ability to stop sinning if he simply chooses to. This teaching runs contrary to a number of passages that indicate man is hopelessly enslaved by his sins (apart from God’s intervention) and that his good works are “dead” or worthless in meriting God’s favor (Ephesians 2:1-2; Matthew 15:18-19; Romans 7:23; Hebrews 6:1; 9:14).

Arminianism: Arminians believe Adam’s sin has resulted in the rest of mankind inheriting a propensity to sin, commonly referred to as having a “sin nature.” This sin nature causes us to sin in the same way that a cat’s nature causes it to meow—it comes naturally. According to this view, man cannot stop sinning on his own; that is why God gives a universal grace to all to enable us to stop. In Arminianism, this grace is called prevenient grace. According to this view, we are not held accountable for Adam’s sin, just our own. This teaching runs contrary to the fact that all bear the punishment for sin, even though all may not have sinned in a manner similar to Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22; Romans 5:12-18). Nor is the teaching of prevenient grace explicitly found in Scripture.

Calvinism: The Calvinistic doctrine states that Adam’s sin has resulted not only in our having a sin nature, but also in our incurring guilt before God for which we deserve punishment. Being conceived with original sin upon us (Psalm 51:5) results in our inheriting a sin nature so wicked that Jeremiah 17:9 describes the human heart as “deceitful above all things and beyond cure.” Not only was Adam found guilty because he sinned, but his guilt and his punishment (death) belongs to us as well (Romans 5:12, 19). There are two views as to why Adam’s guilt should be seen by God as also belonging to us. The first view states that the human race was within Adam in seed form; thus when Adam sinned, we sinned in him. This is similar to the biblical teaching that Levi (a descendant of Abraham) paid tithes to Melchizedek in Abraham (Genesis 14:20; Hebrews 7:4-9), even though Levi was not born until hundreds of years later. The other main view is that Adam served as our representative and so, when he sinned, we were found guilty as well.

The Calvinistic view sees one as unable to overcome his sin apart from the power of the Holy Spirit, a power possessed only when one turns in reliance upon Christ and His atoning sacrifice for sin upon the cross. The Calvinistic view of original sin is most consistent with biblical teaching. However, how can God hold us accountable for a sin we did not personally commit? There is a plausible interpretation that we become responsible for original sin when we choose to accept, and act according to, our sinful nature. There comes a point in our lives when we become aware of our own sinfulness. At that point we should reject the sinful nature and repent of it. Instead, we all “approve” that sinful nature, in effect saying that it is good. In approving our sinfulness, we are expressing agreement with the actions of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. We are therefore guilty of that sin without actually having committed it.

http://www.gotquestions.org/original-sin.html

[Guest]

1 hour ago, gdemoss said:

in is responsible for death in all who have ever died save Christ himself.

The wages of sin is death. 

Sin entered into the world and death by sin when Adam sinned, and as such death passed on to all men.

Sin is personified in Genesis.  

My conclusion is that sin instructs the individual from within and any obedience to the voice of sin is earning the wages of sin which is death.  This is why we are all born in sin and in sin did our mothers conceive us.   Natural born sinners who need to be freed from the power of sin unto God.  

For sin is only imputed where there is a law to be broken yet there is a difference between imputed sin and the consequence of sin to our flesh which is death.

It is quite a meaty topic indeed!

Hi gdemoss

Yes it is. I do not have a good grip on what Imputed means. Does it mean to bring to account in the sense that we are made culpable, made to account for it? Or what?

I do think it might have to do with The law (command) of God to Israel to destroy certain nations. So it does not necessarily mean there is no law before imputation of sin, but no law to call sin to account. But that is just my thinking is all.

[Guest]

39 minutes ago, firestormx said:

Just curious, I have a question. Since most that have replied seem to be against the doctrine of Original sin, does that mean there is a point in life when we are sinless, without sin? I believe in the sin nature of every person except Christ of course, just curious as to others thoughts on this. If we are not born with a original sin does that mean we are born without sin.

 

Good question....Really something to think about.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ezra said:

Correct. The conflict between the flesh and the Spirit is not the subject of this thread. All human beings are ultimately descendants of Adam and Eve, thus "Adam's seed" and all are infected with the *virus* of sin.

I am sorry I did not mean to derail the thread. I just saw the verse saying he struggled because sin dwelled in his flesh. I assumed that to be connected to sin he inherited from Adam through his flesh. Sorry for my ignorance

[Ezra]

1 hour ago, firestormx said:

Just curious, I have a question. Since most that have replied seem to be against the doctrine of Original sin, does that mean there is a point in life when we are sinless, without sin? I believe in the sin nature of every person except Christ of course, just curious as to others thoughts on this. If we are not born with a original sin does that mean we are born without sin.

Actually it is the Catholic term "Original Sin" that is not accepted, since it goes hand-in-hand with infant baptism (please see above), and has its own connotations.

The Bible doctrine is simply the fact that Adam's sin affected the entire human race in two ways: (1) all humans beings are sinners by birth -- "born in sin and shapen in iniquity" (with an Adamic sin nature) therefore "dead in trespasses and sins" and (2) all human beings are sinners by choice ("there is none righteous, no not one").

The sin nature ("the flesh") is NOT eradicated, even though we have a new nature through the New Birth. Hence there is conflict between the flesh and the Spirit.  So no saint can claim to be sinless, yet we all are deemed righteous, with the imputed righteousness of Christ, and sin cannot (and should not) have dominion over us, because of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, Ezra said:

Actually it is the Catholic term "Original Sin" that is not accepted, since it goes hand-in-hand with infant baptism (please see above), and has its own connotations.

The Bible doctrine is simply the fact that Adam's sin affected the entire human race in two ways: (1) all humans beings care sinners by birth -- "born in sin and shapen in iniquity" (with an Adamic sin nature) therefore "dead in trespasses and sins" and (2) all human beings are sinners by choice.

The sin nature ("the flesh") is NOT eradicated, even though we have a new nature through the New Birth. Hence there is conflict between the flesh and the Spirit.  So no saint can claim to be sinless, yet we all are deemed righteous with the imputed righteousness of Christ, and sin cannot (and should not) have dominion over us because of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

So, how one Church deals with "original sin" makes the doctrine untrue?

[Guest]

2 hours ago, bopeep1909 said:

Enoob what do you think of this article? Too Calvinism?

Question: "What is original sin?"

Answer: The term “original sin” deals with Adam’s sin of disobedience in eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and its effects upon the rest of the human race. Original sin can be defined as “that sin and its guilt that we all possess in God’s eyes as a direct result of Adam’s sin in the Garden of Eden.” The doctrine of original sin focuses particularly on its effects on our nature and our standing before God, even before we are old enough to commit conscious sin. There are three main views that deal with that effect.

Pelagianism: This view says that Adam’s sin had no effect upon the souls of his descendants other than his sinful example influencing those who followed after him to also sin. According to this view, man has the ability to stop sinning if he simply chooses to. This teaching runs contrary to a number of passages that indicate man is hopelessly enslaved by his sins (apart from God’s intervention) and that his good works are “dead” or worthless in meriting God’s favor (Ephesians 2:1-2; Matthew 15:18-19; Romans 7:23; Hebrews 6:1; 9:14).

Arminianism: Arminians believe Adam’s sin has resulted in the rest of mankind inheriting a propensity to sin, commonly referred to as having a “sin nature.” This sin nature causes us to sin in the same way that a cat’s nature causes it to meow—it comes naturally. According to this view, man cannot stop sinning on his own; that is why God gives a universal grace to all to enable us to stop. In Arminianism, this grace is called prevenient grace. According to this view, we are not held accountable for Adam’s sin, just our own. This teaching runs contrary to the fact that all bear the punishment for sin, even though all may not have sinned in a manner similar to Adam (1 Corinthians 15:22; Romans 5:12-18). Nor is the teaching of prevenient grace explicitly found in Scripture.

Calvinism: The Calvinistic doctrine states that Adam’s sin has resulted not only in our having a sin nature, but also in our incurring guilt before God for which we deserve punishment. Being conceived with original sin upon us (Psalm 51:5) results in our inheriting a sin nature so wicked that Jeremiah 17:9 describes the human heart as “deceitful above all things and beyond cure.” Not only was Adam found guilty because he sinned, but his guilt and his punishment (death) belongs to us as well (Romans 5:12, 19). There are two views as to why Adam’s guilt should be seen by God as also belonging to us. The first view states that the human race was within Adam in seed form; thus when Adam sinned, we sinned in him. This is similar to the biblical teaching that Levi (a descendant of Abraham) paid tithes to Melchizedek in Abraham (Genesis 14:20; Hebrews 7:4-9), even though Levi was not born until hundreds of years later. The other main view is that Adam served as our representative and so, when he sinned, we were found guilty as well.

The Calvinistic view sees one as unable to overcome his sin apart from the power of the Holy Spirit, a power possessed only when one turns in reliance upon Christ and His atoning sacrifice for sin upon the cross. The Calvinistic view of original sin is most consistent with biblical teaching. However, how can God hold us accountable for a sin we did not personally commit? There is a plausible interpretation that we become responsible for original sin when we choose to accept, and act according to, our sinful nature. There comes a point in our lives when we become aware of our own sinfulness. At that point we should reject the sinful nature and repent of it. Instead, we all “approve” that sinful nature, in effect saying that it is good. In approving our sinfulness, we are expressing agreement with the actions of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. We are therefore guilty of that sin without actually having committed it.

http://www.gotquestions.org/original-sin.html

Reading this was interesting. The Part about Levi being in Abraham, as priestly element of as of a parent. Maybe Adam's sin is active in Children even before the age of accountability in the sense of disobedience to a Parent. Not the same as Adam's sin exactly, but similar in principal.

Children may not be accountable to God directly, but are called to be accountable to a parent.

 

Eph 6:1  Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
2  Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;)
3  That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.

The Parent is to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

4  And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

kinda like a schoolmaster?
 

Pr 22:6  Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.

[firestormx]

1 hour ago, Ezra said:

Actually it is the Catholic term "Original Sin" that is not accepted, since it goes hand-in-hand with infant baptism (please see above), and has its own connotations.

The Bible doctrine is simply the fact that Adam's sin affected the entire human race in two ways: (1) all humans beings are sinners by birth -- "born in sin and shapen in iniquity" (with an Adamic sin nature) therefore "dead in trespasses and sins" and (2) all human beings are sinners by choice ("there is none righteous, no not one").

The sin nature ("the flesh") is NOT eradicated, even though we have a new nature through the New Birth. Hence there is conflict between the flesh and the Spirit.  So no saint can claim to be sinless, yet we all are deemed righteous, with the imputed righteousness of Christ, and sin cannot (and should not) have dominion over us, because of the indwelling Holy Spirit.

Thank you for the clear answer. I do not know or understand a lot of Catholic terms and doctrines. So again , thank you for clarifying. Part of the reason I asked this question was for my understanding and part for anyone who might read this thread, so there was no question. The only verse I had going through my mind when I asked was, whoever says he has no sin is a lair and the truth is not in him. Just wasn't sure how it applied in context to this conversation. God bless

[Ezra]

1 hour ago, Joline said:

So, how one Church deals with "original sin" makes the doctrine untrue?

The doctrine itself is in Scripture, but the dogma created by the RCC is man-made.  Water does not wash away sin or the sin nature.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Ezra said:

The doctrine itself is in Scripture, but the dogma created by the RCC is man-made.  Water does not wash away sin or the sin nature.

oh, so you wish to talk about the doctrine of infant baptism.

I would have liked to have seen the responses to firestormx,s question concerning the doctrine he was addressing