For those who do not believe in "original sin"

[John Zain]

David explains why all humans are sinners ... their inherited sin nature
"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.

[Insight]

David explains why all humans are sinners ... their inherited sin nature
"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.

[John Zain]

Insight,

It's a pity that you have no insight into what God's word reveals to us.
And it's not that complicated ... God had it written for the common man (who can read).
But, those given the understanding have also been given the Holy Spirit,
who was sent to replace Jesus and to teach born-again believers "all things" (John 14:16-26, etc.).

[Insight]

John,

Can you define Jesus' nature

Fallen or unfallen?

Insight

[John Zain]

John, Can you define Jesus' nature Fallen or unfallen?

This has nothing to do with this thread.
Please stick to the subject.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

All those verses show that (a) all people sin, and (b) we all have a natural tendency to do so, even from birth.  These two premises are not seriously disputed by anyone here, to the best of my knowledge.  They also do not constitute the doctrine of "original sin."

The doctrine of "Original Sin," as formulated by St. Augustine, goes much much farther than this:

• It teaches that all men are guilty, and will be damned, as a result of Adam's original sin in the garden.
• It teaches that all men are inherently evil all of the time - that is, that men have no capacity to do right, ever, at all.

These are the points which those who do not adhere to "Original Sin" object to.

The first point is objectionable because it makes God to be unjust, damning one person for another's actions, rather than their own.
The second point is objectionable because it is counter to common sense and experience.  I can go out and do something right at any time, if only for the sake of disproving this point.

Finally, the whole teaching is undesirable because it creates for the hearer a ready excuse for anything they do wrong, and it retains sinning as a part of their identity.  The man who believes this will say, "It is only natural that I sin, for I am a sinner.  (But praise God I'm going to heaven anyway)"

It would be more beneficial if he did not believe this, and could say, "I am a sanctified son of God, and sinning is not what I do.  (Nonetheless I walk imperfectly, and my Father teaches me)."

Jarrod

[Jimmy]

Nice Response.

[Bitter Sweet]

Ditto.

Your last statement gives maturity in Christ a sense of not being an immature child, but the innocence of an obedient one.

[Insight]

John, Can you define Jesus' nature Fallen or unfallen?

This has nothing to do with this thread.
Please stick to the subject.

If the Apostle called our flesh, sin's flesh (Rom 8:3) I believe it has everything to do with this topic.

But what is interesting is your inability to answer the question.

Its duly noted.

Insight

[Insight]

All those verses show that (a) all people sin, and (b) we all have a natural tendency to do so, even from birth.  

This is true.

These two premises are not seriously disputed by anyone here, to the best of my knowledge.  They also do not constitute the doctrine of "original sin."

This is true also.

The doctrine of "Original Sin," as formulated by St. Augustine, goes much much farther than this:

• It teaches that all men are guilty, and will be damned, as a result of Adam's original sin in the garden.

This is not true in one sense else Jesus who was born of a woman would be held guilty.  

In a way Jesus did die to sin once (but not his moral sin) Jesus needed to be condemned to death and sin needed to do this for God to uphold His righteousness. Sin needed to be shown its weakness and in condemning an innocent man to death God was able to destroy flesh's power and as a result forgive others who put their faith and trust in his victory.  

What is truth is as a result of Adams sin we have "inherited

[pointmade]

Jarrod: "The doctrine of "Original Sin," as formulated by St. Augustine, goes much much farther than this:
It teaches that all men are guilty, and will be damned, as a result of Adam's original sin in the garden.
It teaches that all men are inherently evil all of the time - that is, that men have no capacity to do right, ever, at all."

A few years ago I became a acquainted with a young man who left Catholicism
and converted to Islam.
He asked me why I would remain a Christian and follow the teachings of Augustine?

I wasn't too familiar with Islam at that time and as a come back I said,
Well, I am not going to get caught up in a religion that supposedly came out of a cave near
Mecca, by a man ("God's final Prophet") who says that the Qur'an was dictated to him in
Arabic by the angel Gabriel.

He laughed and said, Oh, I see, you follow the teachings of a man who believed
he received a Divine message from God after converting from Manichaeism, to becoming a Neo-Platonist
before becoming the champion of orthodoxy against all heresies and schisms to the Catholic Church.

Rather taken back, I said, why do you believe I follow the teachings of Augustine?
He said, "Catholicism, Protestantism, what ever, all trace their roots to the teaching of Original Sin;
and the mud gets deeper from there."

I found out from my conversation from this man who had taken up Islam in his "search for God"
that I had better get a handle on what they believe, and what they are taught about Christian believe;
and as he said, "the mud gets deeper from there."

He asked me if I would like to debate him on "Spirit regeneration."
I said, first I would like to know what you believe on the subject coming from Islam.....
I found that this was his main objection to Catholicism and Protestantism.
The mud has gotten deeper, and in my last conversation he asked:
"Do you believe that the unsaved mind can understand the Atonement?"

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

Jarrod: "The doctrine of "Original Sin," as formulated by St. Augustine, goes much much farther than this:
It teaches that all men are guilty, and will be damned, as a result of Adam's original sin in the garden.
It teaches that all men are inherently evil all of the time - that is, that men have no capacity to do right, ever, at all."

A few years ago I became a acquainted with a young man who left Catholicism
and converted to Islam.
He asked me why I would remain a Christian and follow the teachings of Augustine?

I wasn't too familiar with Islam at that time and as a come back I said,
Well, I am not going to get caught up in a religion that supposedly came out of a cave near
Mecca, by a man ("God's final Prophet") who says that the Qur'an was dictated to him in
Arabic by the angel Gabriel.

He laughed and said, Oh, I see, you follow the teachings of a man who believed
he received a Divine message from God after converting from Manichaeism, to becoming a Neo-Platonist
before becoming the champion of orthodoxy against all heresies and schisms to the Catholic Church.

Rather taken back, I said, why do you believe I follow the teachings of Augustine?
He said, "Catholicism, Protestantism, what ever, all trace their roots to the teaching of Original Sin;
and the mud gets deeper from there."

I found out from my conversation from this man who had taken up Islam in his "search for God"
that I had better get a handle on what they believe, and what they are taught about Christian believe;
and as he said, "the mud gets deeper from there."

He asked me if I would like to debate him on "Spirit regeneration."
I said, first I would like to know what you believe on the subject coming from Islam.....
I found that this was his main objection to Catholicism and Protestantism.
The mud has gotten deeper, and in my last conversation he asked:
"Do you believe that the unsaved mind can understand the Atonement?"

Both the Catholics and Protestants acquired much of their theology from Augustine (who, btw, wasn't always wrong, even if he did lay a major egg on 'Original Sin').

However, none of the Orthodox accepted any of Augustine or had anything to do with him.  And, many Protestants are still engaged in a Reformation, whose intent is to practice Christianity the way it was practiced at the beginning.  You will find a lot of these like-minded people on this very forum, talking about things like RM - the 'Reformation Movement.'

Also, yes, anyone can understand atonement. 

Jarrod

[John Zain]

These 3 questions were included in Post #1 because I have dialogued with many from all 3 groups:

Jews ... how can you not believe in original sin?
Muslims ... how can you say God's prophets were all sinless?
Christians ... how can you especially not believe in original sin?

And many from all 3 groups disagree with the basic concept that ...
man is born a sinner and cannot help but to sin.

By the way, the Qur'an says in many places that man just "chooses" to sin.

[John Zain]

The doctrine of "Original Sin," as formulated by St. Augustine, goes much much farther than this:

• It teaches that all men are guilty, and will be damned, as a result of Adam's original sin in the garden.
• It teaches that all men are inherently evil all of the time - that is, that men have no capacity to do right, ever, at all.

These are the points which those who do not adhere to "Original Sin" object to.
The first point is objectionable because it makes God to be unjust, damning one person for another's actions, rather than their own.
The second point is objectionable because it is counter to common sense and experience.  
I can go out and do something right at any time, if only for the sake of disproving this point.

I consider Jesus' words to be sufficiently strong to indicate that man has an evil nature.
How does man's occasional goodness, whether genuine or faked, change this fact?
Jesus is speaking to His beloved disciples (minus 1) ...
"If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children ...

[HRoberson]

All those verses show that (a) all people sin, and (b) we all have a natural tendency to do so, even from birth.  These two premises are not seriously disputed by anyone here, to the best of my knowledge.  They also do not constitute the doctrine of "original sin."

The doctrine of "Original Sin," as formulated by St. Augustine, goes much much farther than this:

• It teaches that all men are guilty, and will be damned, as a result of Adam's original sin in the garden.
• It teaches that all men are inherently evil all of the time - that is, that men have no capacity to do right, ever, at all.

These are the points which those who do not adhere to "Original Sin" object to.

The first point is objectionable because it makes God to be unjust, damning one person for another's actions, rather than their own.
The second point is objectionable because it is counter to common sense and experience.  I can go out and do something right at any time, if only for the sake of disproving this point.

Finally, the whole teaching is undesirable because it creates for the hearer a ready excuse for anything they do wrong, and it retains sinning as a part of their identity.  The man who believes this will say, "It is only natural that I sin, for I am a sinner.  (But praise God I'm going to heaven anyway)"

It would be more beneficial if he did not believe this, and could say, "I am a sanctified son of God, and sinning is not what I do.  (Nonetheless I walk imperfectly, and my Father teaches me)."

Jarrod

Agree.

[HRoberson]

These 3 questions were included in Post #1 because I have dialogued with many from all 3 groups:

Jews ... how can you not believe in original sin?
Muslims ... how can you say God's prophets were all sinless?
Christians ... how can you especially not believe in original sin?

And many from all 3 groups disagree with the basic concept that ...
man is born a sinner and cannot help but to sin.

By the way, the Qur'an says in many places that man just "chooses" to sin.

On this point then, the Qur'an is closer to the truth than classic original sin as interpreted through Calvinist and Calvin-like theologies.

[John Zain]

The Qur'an says in many places that man just "chooses" to sin.

On this point then, the Qur'an is closer to the truth than classic original sin
as interpreted through Calvinist and Calvin-like theologies.

Let's see ...
God is love.
God created the human race.
Man chooses sin over love.
Excuse me, allow me to elaborate ... on a daily basis.

Something's wrong with this picture, or did God just screw everything up?

No, man did ... in some garden or other. Next ...

[mark s]

Romans 5:18 NKJV
(18)  Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.

Through one man's offense judgment came to all men.  This does not say that through one man's offense, offenses came to everyone, bringing judgment and condemnation.  Through one man's offense.

Love in Christ,
Mark

PS . . . John . . . I see what you mean!

[John Zain]

Mark,

I appreciate your signature ...
ειπεν αυτη ο ιησους εγω ειμι η αναστασις και η ζωη ο πιστευων εις εμε καν αποθανη ζησεται
. . . saying to her Jesus, I AM the resurrection and the life, the one believing into Me even dying shall live . . .

Jesus claimed to be "I AM

[Talking Donkey]

There are two things that changed when Adam sinned.

Before they sinned ...

1.  They were naked and not ashamed.

2.  They lack the knowledge of good and evil.

After the fall, they became aware they were naked and they became aware of good and evil.

When we people are born, those toddlers walk naked and are not ashamed... and they lack the knowledge of good and evil.  This is evident in the Bible where God did not let the adults enter the promised land because they were accountable.  But the children, because they were not accountable for lacking the knowledge of good and evil, they did enter the promised land.  It is written:

Deut 1:39 Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

Therefore, when we are born, are arrive on this planet with the evidence of Adam BEFORE the fall, not after.  

Peace