
Darthmiller
|
SinOriginal sin? Original guilt? Is the concept Biblical?
Answers on a post card............actually no...no....answers here makes more sense
|
paulvipond
|
Having already pontificated on the altdot message board about this one (See "Born Guilty?") I await other posts with interest.
|
Eli
|
You'd debate this?
Wow!
|
countrydancer
|
sinOf course the concept of Original Sin is Biblical. You think not? Why?
|
Darthmiller
|
You think so? Why? Some readings people
|
countrydancer
|
sinIn answer to Darth Miller's request I don't think I can do better than share the following. I might also ask, has he read John Wesley's sermons?(specifically no 44)
What is the biblical evidence for original sin?
Download:
By DG Staff January 23, 2006
There are several lines of biblical evidence for the historic Christian doctrine that we are all born into the world with sinful natures, due to the sin of Adam.
Scripture says that we are born sinners and that we are by nature sinners
Psalm 51:5 states that we all come into the world as sinners: "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me." Ephesians 2:2 says that all people who are not in Christ are "sons of disobedience." Ephesians 2:3 also establishes this, saying that we are all "by nature children of wrath." If we are all "by nature children of wrath," it can only be because we are all by nature sinners--for God does not direct His wrath towards those who are not guilty. God did not create the human race sinful, but upright. But we fell into sin and became sinful due to the sin of Adam.
Scripture speaks of humans as unrighteous from infancy
There are also verses which declare that we are all unrighteous from the time that we are born. Proverbs 22:15 says "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child." Genesis 8:21 declares, "...the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth." Jonathon Edwards, in his classic work The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin Defended, remarks that on this verse: "The word translated youth, signifies the whole of the former part of the age of man, which commences from the beginning of life. The word in its derivation, has reference to the birth or beginning of existence...so that the word here translated youth, comprehends not only what we in English most commonly call the time of youth, but also childhood and infancy."
Humanity is Often Described in General Terms as Unrighteous
Unrighteousness is often spoken of in Scripture as something belonging to the human race as a whole.This implies that it is the property of our species. In other words, sinfulness is considered a property of human nature after the fall. Thus, it must be concluded that we are all born sinners, since we are all born human and sin is regarded as a property of humanity. In this vein, consider Ephesians 2:1-3:
And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.
Paul is here reminding Christians of what they were like before their conversion to Christ ("you were dead in your trespasses...in which you formerly walked"). Thus, all people, until and unless they are converted, are sinners. Paul goes on to make it absolutely clear that all Christians came from this state ("...we to all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh") and that all non-Christians are still in this state ("...and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest.") Thus, Scripture regards all people before they are saved by Christ as sinners and thus deserving of punishment from God. Which is to say that from the inception of our existence, we are sinful.
In Psalm 14:2, 3 we read: "The Lord has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God. They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one." Here again we see unrighteousness as a property of the human race: "they have all turned aside...there is no one who does good."
Job 15:14 similarly declares that sinfulness is a property of humanity: "What is man, that he should be pure, or he who is born of a woman, that he should be righteous?" Verses 15-16 then speaks of the human race as a whole in shocking terms expressing our general corruption: "Behold, He puts no trust in His holy ones, And the heavens are not pure in His sight; How much less one who is detestable and corrupt, Man, who drinks iniquity like water!"
Jeremiah 17:9 says that "the heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it." This seems to assume original sin--wickedness is a property of the human heart. Ecclesiastes 9:3 declares a similar truth: "...the hearts of the sons of men are full of evil, and insanity is in their hearts through their lives." Again, the human heart is sinful, and therefore all humans are sinful.
These texts indicate, then, that human nature is corrupt. Therefore, even infants are corrupt because they are human. And if infants are corrupt, then this is the same as saying that we are born corrupt--which means we are born with original sin. One may, however, object that these texts speak nothing of infants, only those who are old enough to make moral decisions. All of those people are sinful, but this doesn't mean that infants are.
This is an ingenious objection, but it does not succeed. First, the texts do not seem to restrict themselves to people who are old enough to make intelligent decisions. They seem to speak of human nature as a whole, a classification under which infants certainly fall. Second, as Jonathan Edwards pointed out, "..this would not alter the case...For if all mankind, as soon as ever they are capable of reflecting, and knowing their own moral state, find themselves wicked, this proves that they are wicked by nature."
In other words, even if these verses were only speaking of people old enough to mentally understand sin, they would still be teaching original sin. For on that view, these verses would be saying that all people, as soon as they know good from evil, find themselves sinners. But if all people, as soon as they are capable of moral decisions, find themselves sinners, this proves that they are that way by nature.
Third, Edwards also says, "why should man be so continually spoken of as evil, carnal, perverse, deceitful, and desperately wicked, if all men are by nature as perfectly innocent, and free form any propensity to evil, as Adam was the first moment of his creation?" (Edwards, The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin, 188).
Infants die, therefore they are not innocent
Death--both physical and spiritual--is a result of sin (Romans 5:12; 6:23). Thus, death only comes upon those who have sinned. Since infants die, they therefore must be sinners. It could be objected that Christ was sinless, and yet He died. But He willingly gave up His life, and He did it to conquer the curse of death that we were under. In fact, God imputed to Christ our sins on the cross, and Christ died in punishment of those sins.
If humanity is not born in sin, wouldn't we expect there to be some people who have "beaten the odds" and never sinned?
If we are born innocent and good, why aren't there at least some people who have continued in this state and remained sinless? The fact that everybody sins needs some explanation. The best explanation is that we are sinners by nature. Someone might argue that the reason all people sin is because society is sinful, and thus society renders it impossible for anybody to keep themselves entirely pure. But that only pushes the question back one step. How did society get sinful in the first place? If people are born morally good, then how did it come about that they congregated into socities that influence all people to sin?
Further Resources
Jonathan Edwards, The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin Defended in The Works of Jonathan Edwards Volume I, pp. 143-233.
Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, chapter 24, "Sin."
© Desiring God
Permissions: You are permitted and encouraged to reproduce and distribute this material in any format provided that you do not alter the wording in any way, you do not charge a fee beyond the cost of reproduction, and you do not make more than 1,000 physical copies. For web posting, a link to this document on our website is preferred. Any exceptions to the above must be explicitly approved by Desiring God.
Please include the following statement on any distributed copy: By John Piper. © Desiring God. Website: www.desiringGod.org. Email: mail@desiringGod.org. Toll Free: 1.888.346.4700.
|
Darthmiller
|
Is being sinful in nature the same as being guilty, the doctrine of original sin says man has inherited the sin of Adam and because of this as Augustine of Hippo (the guy who put forth the concept of original sin) says unbaptised children who die go to hell because they are sinners.
Some more questions.
How come Enoch was taken into heaven without having accepted Christ, and Elijah too?
In Job 1:1 Job is said to be blameless and upright, how does that fit with original sin?
If Jesus was fully human does that mean he was touched by original sin?
|
paulvipond
|
I suppose one has to start by saying that if this was clear cut, without arguments on both sides, there would be nothing to answer.
Countrydancer sets out the calvinistic camp position. However some of the "proof texts " quoted are to say the least ambiguous and may represent an unconcious reading back into the text what calvinists expect to be there.
Take Psalm 51: 5, mercifully quoted from the ESV and not The NIV which assumes everyone is a calvinist.
Psalms 51:5 (ESV) 5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
Who is doing the sinning in this sentence? At least one jewish tradition has it that David was conceived illegitimately but born in wedlock. Hence the poor treatment of him by his father and brothers. Interesting if true.
Also "righteous" does not mean "sinless" so how does "unrighteous" = "sinful"?
How do we jump from "children of wrath" to "by nature sinners"? And from "by nature sinners" to "original sin"?
If you follow the Jonathan Edwards argument that "youth" includes conceived but unborn babies then there are going to be millions of aborted foetuses spending eternity without God. I am not at all sure that is consonant with the rest of Scripture.
"Jeremiah 17:9 says that "the heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; who can understand it." This seems to assume original sin--wickedness is a property of the human heart."
Rule No.1 of a reasoned position - assume nothing!
"If humanity is not born in sin, wouldn't we expect there to be some people who have "beaten the odds" and never sinned?" Non-sequitor. Try Adam, he was born without sin and look at the trouble he caused!
On the other side:
"In Job 1:1 Job is said to be blameless and upright, how does that fit with original sin?"
Paul also said he was blamelss under the Law. That doesn't mean sinless perfection but just that he undertook the precribed sacrifices for sin in accordance with the Law.
At the end of the day the Scripture says that we all have sinned, and I dont know anyone who hasn't. Praise God my sins have been forgiven.
The Court is still out on this one. As Darth points out there is a big step from "a sinful nature" to "born guilty".
|
countrydancer
|
sinDarth
All you seem to do is ask questions?
What is your view on this subject?
With readings person!
|
DavidH
|
| Darthmiller wrote: |
How come Enoch was taken into heaven without having accepted Christ, and Elijah too?
In Job 1:1 Job is said to be blameless and upright, how does that fit with original sin?
If Jesus was fully human does that mean he was touched by original sin? |
Both Enoch and Elijah are the only two people in history to avoid natural (or unnatural) death. This gives some the idea that they will be sent back as the "two witnesses" of the book of the Revelation, as they will ultimately be killed, thus confirming the scriptures about ALL being under the penalty of death for sin. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive 1Cor 15:22
In answer to the question about Job, it would be wise to have a look at how people were "saved" in the Old Testament. Job is being used by God to show Satan that, whatever he does, he can't change the salvation status of one who truly serves God. God sees Job as "blameless and upright" just as He sees you and me as "righteous". Both you and I know that we're far from righteous in our own estimation but that righteousness is imputed to us by the sacrifice of the spotless Lamb of God.
Romans 4 tells us that Abraham's righteousness was imputed to him for his faith, ours is by faith in the risen Christ.
Job proves his constancy throughout by refusing to "curse God and die." Of course, Satan isn't allowed to kill Job, as this would effectively ruin the whole purpose of his efforts. Satan's aim is to remove Job's status in God's eyes, not kill him and send him to Heaven.
As for Jesus, the very nature of His birth precluded "original" sin, being the child of God through the overshadowing of Mary by the Holy Spirit. The sin nature is through the sin of Adam (ie. the male line) not through the woman. 1Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive Thus Jesus was both man (being born of a woman) and God at the same time, (although He did lay aside His glory to appear in the flesh.)
Jesus had to be sinless in order to be the "spotless" Lamb of God. That was the reason for the virgin birth. It wasn't just a random miracle done to impress a few shepherds and Eastern visitors.
What's your take on these things, Darth?
|
Darthmiller
|
I believe human beings are sinful in nature and it is a nature only one man ever and will ever overcome and that man was Jesus.
Our sinful nature means that we commit sins even when we are not aware of them, but I believe Jesus was the most self aware anyone can be and therefore was able to reign in that weakness and put it under God.
Ultimately I am not really sure, all I can be sure of is I am a sinner and I have only ever met one sinless man and his name was Jesus Christ, that is all I really need to know, and as for babies and children, we if they are born with the sin of Adam on them and they do not get baptised as BELIEVERS, I believe in a merciful God and I put them in his hands
|
slim
|
i have read all of your post with intrest
of course as a methodist church one would expect a defense of the armenian way, i myself have leaned towards calvin, in that i believe what august said to be true, Lord give us what thou commandest and comand what thou wilt,
if you believe in original sin then Logicaly you have to follow the 5 points of calvin however limited attonement is not easy to swallow,
we recently as a church studdied this subject and the problem comes with this is when we forget that we are reading a very jewish book, that does not go in with conjunction with our greco roman thinking.
the hebrew mind can and does hold to contentious thoughts as truth, this seems illogical to us, but as the psalmist wrote, there is silence in your presence and the heavens are filled with your praise, contention an opposite.
Man is fallen and incapable of saving himself it is a work of God and yet man must also take responsibility and respond to his sinful state so as to be saved.
|
Eli
|
| slim wrote: | i have read all of your post with intrest
of course as a methodist church one would expect a defense of the armenian way, i myself have leaned towards calvin, in that i believe what august said to be true, Lord give us what thou commandest and comand what thou wilt,
-- snip --
we recently as a church studdied this subject and the problem comes with this is when we forget that we are reading a very jewish book, that does not go in with conjunction with our greco roman thinking.
the hebrew mind can and does hold to contentious thoughts as truth, this seems illogical to us, but as the psalmist wrote, there is silence in your presence and the heavens are filled with your praise, contention an opposite.
Man is fallen and incapable of saving himself it is a work of God and yet man must also take responsibility and respond to his sinful state so as to be saved. |
This is a long post. Apologies but some definition needs to be given over the predestination to election/damnation discussion...
I think you meant Arminian rather than Armenian, didn't you? And by your last statement, you're at loggerheads with a lot of Calvinists that I know.
Also, you're not reading a "very Jewish" book at all. You're reading God's book, written through the centuries by a wide variety of people. This is God's Word and whilst God's people, the Jews, have been influenced by the book, the book was not influenced by them - right? To relegate the lively oracles of God to a mere collection of Jewish literature is nothing less than warmed over rabbinicism - the scourge of modern church life. You would have to say that the Jews are biblical rather than the Bible is Jewish.
On the Arminian/Calvinist thing, which I'm surprised hasn't reared its ugly head here before, I'll lay my cards on the table. I'm a Christian.
The five points, for those who aren't familiar, can be summed up in the acronym TULIP.
TOTAL DEPRAVITY OR INABILITY (= "T" of TULIP)
The first point asserts that the entire or TOTAL human being--body and soul, intellect and will, etc.--is fallen and that everyone is born spiritually dead, helpless, and passive; indeed, everyone is worse than volitionally dead or unable to desire spiritual good but is actually enslaved to sin, positively and actively hostile to the things of the Spirit (Calvinists cite, e.g., John. 1:13; 8:43, 47; 10:26; 12:37-40; 18:37; Romans. 7:18; 8:5-8; 1 Corinthians. 2:9-14).
UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION (= "U" of TULIP)
The second point inescapably follows from the first: since one is born totally depraved and enslaved to sin, one's ELECTION cannot be dependent or CONTINGENT on any spiritually worthy actions one commits. According to this point, God predestines or chooses to soften the hard, sin-enslaved hearts of certain fallen individuals and liberate them from their death not because of any merit they have but despite their demerits--i.e., He ELECTS to change their hearts (and thereby join them to Christ and His saving work) DESPITE the fact that they hate God and oppose Him and have hard hearts, not soft hearts, and have sin-enslaved wills, not free wills. Thus, believers have no reason to boast about themselves or their own actions: the only thing that differentiates them from Judas, Esau, or others who never respond in faith is that God gave them grace that He withheld from such reprobates (Calvinists cite, e.g., Ezek. 11:19-20; 36:26-27; Rom. 9:11-18; 1 Cor. 4:7; Eph. 2:8-10; cf. Jn. 1:13; 15:16; Acts 13:48; 16:14; 18:27; Phil. 2:13).
LIMITED ATONEMENT or Particular Redemption (= "L" of TULIP)
This point says that while Christ's blood--indeed, His entire life, death, and resurrection--is infinitely INTENSIVE in saving power and thus unlimited in one sense, it is not infinitely EXTENSIVE and is thus limited, not universal, in the extent of its application; for while everyone CONDITIONALLY or "provisionally" shares in Christ's life, death, and resurrection (thus, if everyone believed, everyone would be joined or married to Christ), only members of Christ's body or bride or flock (ELECT believers) actually share in His blood (Calvinists cite, e.g., Jn. 10:11, 15, 26; 17:9; cf. 6:37, 39; 17:2, 6, 24).
IRRESISTIBLE (SUFFICIENT) GRACE (= "I" of TULIP)
This is virtually a synonym for Luther's slogan "grace alone" (sola gratia) and is logically implied by points "T" and "U" above. It teaches that God's INWARD CALL is perfectly EFFECTUAL or SUFFICIENT--a hard, fleshly, sinful heart need not add anything to God's grace, such as "co-operation," for this special call or grace is invincible, overpowering all hatred and melting all opposition (Calvinists cite, e.g., Jn. 3:6- . Here Calvinists distinguish God's inward, effectual call--i.e., IRRESISTIBLE GRACE or sufficient, effective grace--from His outward call, which is simply His commandments written on tablets of stone. The latter is eminently resistible, insufficient, and ineffective to give life to a dead soul or liberate a sin-enslaved heart (e.g., Acts 7:51; 13:39; Rom. 8:3).
PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS or Eternal Security (= "P" of TULIP)
This is not the idea that no matter what a believer does he or she cannot lose his or her salvation but the idea that " . . . He who began a good work in you will perfect it . . " (Phil. 1:6 [NASB]; cf., e.g., Jn. 6:37, 39; 10:28-29; Rom. 8:31-39)--i.e., the idea that whenever God creates faith in our hearts and thereby joins us to Christ and His saving work, He will sustain that faith, that saving relationship with Christ, causing us, by His grace, to persevere in faith.
Whilst the Calvinists cite all these scriptures to justify their position. Arminians are fond of quoting John Wesley, (of all people):
# All need to be saved - "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23) - Sin is a deep-seated self-seeking from which no-one is immune.
# All can be saved - We can be saved from the consequences of our sin through the work of Jesus Christ on the cross. This is a Gospel ('good news') for everyone - "God sent the Son into the world... that the world might be saved through him" (John 3:17)
# All may know themselves to be saved - through the promises in scripture, the intense conviction of God's graciousness to us individually, and a different outlook on life leading to a changed quality of living - "If you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord', and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved." (Romans 10:9)
# All may be saved to the uttermost - there can be no limits on what God can do in our lives, as we are continually becoming more perfect in love for God and our fellow humans
|
|
|
|