Redemption and Original Sin

[HRoberson]

OK, so I've read Francis' statement, I've read and heard the talking heads, and I've read the threads on this board.


Still have a question: If all men are redeemed, how does original sin continue to effect people? Somebody walk me through this please.


Thanks

[AVZ]

OK, so I've read Francis' statement, I've read and heard the talking heads, and I've read the threads on this board.


Still have a question: If all men are redeemed, how does original sin continue to effect people? Somebody walk me through this please.


Thanks

The question would only arise on the presumption that all men are redeemed.
Could you be so kind and elaborate where this presumption comes from?

[HRoberson]

OK, so I've read Francis' statement, I've read and heard the talking heads, and I've read the threads on this board.


Still have a question: If all men are redeemed, how does original sin continue to effect people? Somebody walk me through this please.


Thanks

The question would only arise on the presumption that all men are redeemed.
Could you be so kind and elaborate where this presumption comes from?

Let's just allow the presumption for discussion's sake, OK?

[winsome]

 OK,

I'll have a go.

By the Redemption is meant that Jesus Christ, as the Redeemer of the whole human race, offered His sufferings and death to God as a fitting sacrifice in satisfaction for the sins of men, and regained for them the right to be children of God and heirs of heaven. (Baltimore Catechism).

That satisfaction is sufficient (super-sufficient) to atone for the sins of the whole world throughout all time. However that saving work of Christ has to be applied to us individually.

Moreover the atonement was for the sins we commit. "Original sin" is not a sin we commit but more of an effect on us of the original sin of Adam. ".....this sin affected the human nature that they [Adam and Eve] would then transmit in a fallen state."

When Adam sinned he lost "the grace of original holiness" (cf Rom 3:23); "the control of the soul's spiritual faculties over the body is shattered". "Harmony with creation is broken". "Because of man, creation is now subject 'to bondage and decay' (Rom 8:21)". 

Quotes in blue are from the Catechism of the Catholic Church

[HRoberson]

Thanks Winsome.


Let me see if I can articulate my conundrum a bit more cogently.


If original sin is a (the) consequence of the Fall that separates Man from God...


And if Jesus redeemed all Men.....as the Second Adam.....


How does original sin remain with Man?


What did the redeeming "do" in practical terms?

[winsome]

Hi HR,
I've been thinking of this and I've come up with this analogy. I think it works, but we shall see.

Benedict Groschel call original sin the original wound. We live in a world almost drowning in sin and we are all affected by that. Let me stick with the metaphor of the original wound and think of us as sick, in a world rampant with diseases of all kinds and with an almost useless immune system.

Think of Christ's work of redemption as the building of a hospital with all the medicines we need to be cured (forgiveness and grace).

To be cured we need to go to the hospital – to Jesus. That cures us of the sickness but still leaves our immune system weak (= concupiscence)

When we leave the hospital we are immersed in the diseases of the world with an immune system still weak.

To bring us to the state we should be if Adam and Eve had not sinned we need:
- to keep to a healthy lifestyle (virtue, good works)
- nourishing food (Eucharist)
- to go back to hospital when we get sick (forgiveness)
- to strengthen our immune system (pilgrimages, mortification)

All this is the work of grace in us – grace that Jesus bought on the cross.

[mclees8]

I think we are trying to complicate the matter. And this is surprising that Christians who have heard the gospel and and consider themselves saved still do not know that the simplicity of Salvation is first a personal confession of faith    Its like not being able to see the forest for the trees. Original sin is the fall of man. We are now under the curse of the original sin and the nature of sin is in us. Jesus did suffer the cross for all men but  not all men will be saved.
Remember John 3:16? For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son that whomsoever believes in Him shall have eternal life.

if the whole world would believe then all men would be saved, but no where in scripture do we find that that is ever going to happen. Hence the Judgment must come. It s not a blanket covering salvation but one has to believe upon Christ.

[AVZ]

The question put forth in this thread is based on the presumption that Jesus died for all men.
This of course (as Mclees already stated) not the case. Jesus did not take sin away, and neither did He redeem all people.

The Fall brought sin into this world. Without the Fall we would all be living in Paradise and there would have been no need for Jesus to die for our sins.
Grace and forgiveness are freely offered, but as the scriptures state they must be accepted in order to have effect.

The parable of the sower says it all...some seeds fall in good soil and other seeds fall on the rocks.
Some people will accept, and some will reject.

With acknowledgement to what Winsome wrote, he is missing the most important part of salvation which is that we must believe in order to be saved.
The Bible states: Whosoever believes in his hart, and proclaims with his mouth shall be saved.
So it's not only about what we can do: virtue, good works, eucharist, ask for forgiveness, pilgrimages, mortification...) but about believing in what Jesus has done for us!

We mistakenly think that original sin only effects people, but that is incorrect.
Original sin has effected the whole of creation. It doesn't "remain with man" only, it remains in every aspect of creation.
Romans 8:22 "We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time."

Jesus' redemption goes much further than the redemption of "just men", it covers the whole of creation, past, present and future.
That's why we, with all our good intentions or good works, will never be able to bring ourselves to the state we should be if Adam and Eve had not sinned.

[winsome]

The question put forth in this thread is based on the presumption that Jesus died for all men.
This of course (as Mclees already stated) not the case. Jesus did not take sin away, and neither did He redeem all people.

HR asked  that "Let's just allow the presumption for discussion's sake, OK?"

The Fall brought sin into this world. Without the Fall we would all be living in Paradise and there would have been no need for Jesus to die for our sins.
Grace and forgiveness are freely offered, but as the scriptures state they must be accepted in order to have effect.

The parable of the sower says it all...some seeds fall in good soil and other seeds fall on the rocks.
Some people will accept, and some will reject.

Agreed

With acknowledgement to what Winsome wrote, he is missing the most important part of salvation which is that we must believe in order to be saved.

The Bible states: Whosoever believes in his hart, and proclaims with his mouth shall be saved.
So it's not only about what we can do: virtue, good works, eucharist, ask for forgiveness, pilgrimages, mortification...) but about believing in what Jesus has done for us!

HR's question was about redemption not about salvation.

Moreover I said in my analogy: "To be cured we need to go to the hospital – to Jesus."

We wouldn't go to Jesus unless we believed in him.

We mistakenly think that original sin only effects people, but that is incorrect.
Original sin has effected the whole of creation. It doesn't "remain with man" only, it remains in every aspect of creation.
Romans 8:22 "We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time."

Jesus' redemption goes much further than the redemption of "just men", it covers the whole of creation, past, present and future.

Agreed but HR was specifically asking about the effect on men not on the whole of creation.

That's why we, with all our good intentions or good works, will never be able to bring ourselves to the state we should be if Adam and Eve had not sinned.

Agreed. We cannot - but God can.

[mclees8]

The question put forth in this thread is based on the presumption that Jesus died for all men.
This of course (as Mclees already stated) not the case. Jesus did not take sin away, and neither did He redeem all people.

HR asked  that "Let's just allow the presumption for discussion's sake, OK?"

The Fall brought sin into this world. Without the Fall we would all be living in Paradise and there would have been no need for Jesus to die for our sins.
Grace and forgiveness are freely offered, but as the scriptures state they must be accepted in order to have effect.

The parable of the sower says it all...some seeds fall in good soil and other seeds fall on the rocks.
Some people will accept, and some will reject.

Agreed

With acknowledgement to what Winsome wrote, he is missing the most important part of salvation which is that we must believe in order to be saved.

The Bible states: Whosoever believes in his hart, and proclaims with his mouth shall be saved.
So it's not only about what we can do: virtue, good works, eucharist, ask for forgiveness, pilgrimages, mortification...) but about believing in what Jesus has done for us!

HR's question was about redemption not about salvation.

Moreover I said in my analogy: "To be cured we need to go to the hospital – to Jesus."

We wouldn't go to Jesus unless we believed in him.

We mistakenly think that original sin only effects people, but that is incorrect.
Original sin has effected the whole of creation. It doesn't "remain with man" only, it remains in every aspect of creation.
Romans 8:22 "We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time."

Jesus' redemption goes much further than the redemption of "just men", it covers the whole of creation, past, present and future.

Agreed but HR was specifically asking about the effect on men not on the whole of creation.

That's why we, with all our good intentions or good works, will never be able to bring ourselves to the state we should be if Adam and Eve had not sinned.

Agreed. We cannot - but God can.

Isn't that the real issue. isn't that what he did for us by sacrificing his Son for us.To assume anything for else just  for discussion is fruitless and pointless. We cannot save ourselves So he offered us a way out and we but only have to trust in Him.  Oh yes ! About  redemption and salvation, they are one and the same. We are redeemed by the blood of the lamb.  All this is the basic tenants of our faith. no mystery.

[AVZ]

Yet I am still pondering what HR wants to achieve with his question.

[winsome]

Yet I am still pondering what HR wants to achieve with his question.

To get a Catholic perspective perhaps?

[HRoberson]

Yet I am still pondering what HR wants to achieve with his question.

To get a Catholic perspective perhaps?

That is correct. I'm not looking for debate but strictly a Catholic technical understanding of the interplay between OS and the redemption extended to all men.

[mclees8]

Yet I am still pondering what HR wants to achieve with his question.

To get a Catholic perspective perhaps?

That is correct. I'm not looking for debate but strictly a Catholic technical understanding of the interplay between OS and the redemption extended to all men.

Could you put at in more common terms.   

However Winsomes statement about redemption and salvation did leave  me to wonder a little     

[HRoberson]

Please see the OP and reply #5.

What is the theological affect of redemption as Francis used the term, and as it is used in Catholic theology?

As I understand it, Original Sin is what separates Man from God, as a result of the Fall of the First Adam.

Francis said that Man has been redeemed because of the work of Jesus, the Second Adam.

If the Second Adam reversed the affect of the First Adam by redeeming Man, what role does Original Sin play at this point, and why?

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

If original sin is a (the) consequence of the Fall that separates Man from God...

And if Jesus redeemed all Men.....as the Second Adam.....

How does original sin remain with Man?

Cause and effect.  If I run a sewage pipe down to the pond, the pond will be polluted. 

If someone turns off the pump and stop sending sewage there, that doesn't immediately mean the pond will be clean again.

I know how you love metaphors.

Jarrod

[HRoberson]

If original sin is a (the) consequence of the Fall that separates Man from God...

And if Jesus redeemed all Men.....as the Second Adam.....

How does original sin remain with Man?

Cause and effect.  If I run a sewage pipe down to the pond, the pond will be polluted. 

If someone turns off the pump and stop sending sewage there, that doesn't immediately mean the pond will be clean again.

I know how you love metaphors.

Jarrod

Yeah, but no. Redemption (as I understand it) came as a result of the Second Adam correcting the problem with the First Adam. All at once.

[Wycliffes_Shillelagh]

If original sin is a (the) consequence of the Fall that separates Man from God...

And if Jesus redeemed all Men.....as the Second Adam.....

How does original sin remain with Man?

Cause and effect.  If I run a sewage pipe down to the pond, the pond will be polluted. 

If someone turns off the pump and stop sending sewage there, that doesn't immediately mean the pond will be clean again.

I know how you love metaphors.

Jarrod

Yeah, but no. Redemption (as I understand it) came as a result of the Second Adam correcting the problem with the First Adam. All at once.

Hmmm... It seems to me that it's more of a case of the second Adam replacing the first Adam, than correcting the problem with him.  But I don't know what the official doctrine of the RCC is.

Jarrod

[mclees8]

Please see the OP and reply #5.

What is the theological affect of redemption as Francis used the term, and as it is used in Catholic theology?

As I understand it, Original Sin is what separates Man from God, as a result of the Fall of the First Adam.

Francis said that Man has been redeemed because of the work of Jesus, the Second Adam.

If the Second Adam reversed the affect of the First Adam by redeeming Man, what role does Original Sin play at this point, and why?

HG  I think you are just kicking the can around the block. Where do we figure the second Adam (Jesus) reversed original sin. As far as Adams Salvation you will have to ask God.

I am still surprised this issue is floating here. The curse of original sin is still alive and well In this present world. We still fight with our sin nature  and will until the judgment. Salvation is extended only to those who receive Christ. The unbelieving world is still going to be judged

[HRoberson]

Please see the OP and reply #5.

What is the theological affect of redemption as Francis used the term, and as it is used in Catholic theology?

As I understand it, Original Sin is what separates Man from God, as a result of the Fall of the First Adam.

Francis said that Man has been redeemed because of the work of Jesus, the Second Adam.

If the Second Adam reversed the affect of the First Adam by redeeming Man, what role does Original Sin play at this point, and why?

HG  I think you are just kicking the can around the block. Where do we figure the second Adam (Jesus) reversed original sin. As far as Adams Salvation you will have to ask God.

I am still surprised this issue is floating here. The curse of original sin is still alive and well In this present world. We still fight with our sin nature  and will until the judgment. Salvation is extended only to those who receive Christ. The unbelieving world is still going to be judged

Just interested in how OS correlates with Man's redemption. This is a technical question, not a debate. So if you care to enlighten me, go right ahead.

[mclees8]

Please see the OP and reply #5.

What is the theological affect of redemption as Francis used the term, and as it is used in Catholic theology?

As I understand it, Original Sin is what separates Man from God, as a result of the Fall of the First Adam.

Francis said that Man has been redeemed because of the work of Jesus, the Second Adam.

If the Second Adam reversed the affect of the First Adam by redeeming Man, what role does Original Sin play at this point, and why?

HG  I think you are just kicking the can around the block. Where do we figure the second Adam (Jesus) reversed original sin. As far as Adams Salvation you will have to ask God.

I am still surprised this issue is floating here. The curse of original sin is still alive and well In this present world. We still fight with our sin nature  and will until the judgment. Salvation is extended only to those who receive Christ. The unbelieving world is still going to be judged

Just interested in how OS correlates with Man's redemption. This is a technical question, not a debate. So if you care to enlighten me, go right ahead.

Enlighten you ??.    I don't think we are even on the same page.

I think I have to go now.

[HRoberson]

Please see the OP and reply #5.

What is the theological affect of redemption as Francis used the term, and as it is used in Catholic theology?

As I understand it, Original Sin is what separates Man from God, as a result of the Fall of the First Adam.

Francis said that Man has been redeemed because of the work of Jesus, the Second Adam.

If the Second Adam reversed the affect of the First Adam by redeeming Man, what role does Original Sin play at this point, and why?

HG  I think you are just kicking the can around the block. Where do we figure the second Adam (Jesus) reversed original sin. As far as Adams Salvation you will have to ask God.

I am still surprised this issue is floating here. The curse of original sin is still alive and well In this present world. We still fight with our sin nature  and will until the judgment. Salvation is extended only to those who receive Christ. The unbelieving world is still going to be judged

Just interested in how OS correlates with Man's redemption. This is a technical question, not a debate. So if you care to enlighten me, go right ahead.

Enlighten you ??.    I don't think we are even on the same page.

I think I have to go now.

OK

[epiphanius]

The question put forth in this thread is based on the presumption that Jesus died for all men.
This of course (as Mclees already stated) not the case. Jesus did not take sin away, and neither did He redeem all people.

AV,

Things may not be as simple as they seem.

As for "Jesus did not take sin away,"

The next day, he saw Jesus coming to him, and said, "Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world! (Jn. 1:29)

And as for, "neither did He redeem all people,"

For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive. (1Cor. 15:22)

Now, I'm not saying here that "original sin has now gone away" or anything like that.  Only asking you not to be so quick to dismiss HR's original question.

[BlackSepulcher]

OK, so I've read Francis' statement, I've read and heard the talking heads, and I've read the threads on this board.


Still have a question: If all men are redeemed, how does original sin continue to effect people? Somebody walk me through this please.


Thanks

It's quite simple, really:

Redemption does not heal the 'wound'.
The damage of original sin is still there, and can only be healed through the continued walk with Christ.

This is the core philosophy of Purgatory- in redemption, we still have to be shaped and prepared for the Beatific Vision. This is why we have to suffer with our sins, and the remnant be cleansed thereafter if necessary.

[Jimmy]

Now, I'm not saying here that "original sin has now gone away" or anything like that.  Only asking you not to be so quick to dismiss HR's original question.

Romans 5:18-19 clearly says that, whatever the effects Adam's disobedience might have been on mankind, Jesus' obedience completely nullified it.  I don't think any would argue Jesus' obedience was not retroactive to the very beginning.

[Tyler]

True ----As I understand, Calvin (and Luther) following Augustine, took the Greek view of God, i.e.. that the sovereignty of God demanded that He be unchangeable and that His will be the only truly free will in the universe. Augustine and Calvin, therefore, saw the decree of God as the CAUSE, the choice of man (in the Garden) as the EFFECT, rather than the other way around.

John Calvin's (Remember, Calvin was a French Catholic priest) point of reference for all his theology was a misunderstanding of Romans 9. His theology was also, in part, a reaction to the Medieval Roman Catholic system which saw Heaven at the mercy of the whims of man. (Example: the sale and use of indulgences, the habit of popes banning people from salvation.)

God is just, and justice requires the punishment of sin. ("All have sinned and fallen short of the character of God"). The holiness of God is not an attribute that He chooses, it is His very nature.
Sin requires our damnation Hebrews 12:29. Sin is a violation of the very nature of God.

Something to think about: If sin goes unpunished, unresolved, for eternity, then sin ultimately prospers and becomes an eternally evil principle that co-exists with the eternally righteous God.
If this were to be the situation, then God would not be absolutely holy because absolute holiness not only cannot commit sin, it cannot (forever) permit sin. (We recognize that even human righteousness cannot permit sin where opportunity exists to stop it). The scales would ever be out of balance. If the Bible did not teach eternal punishment, logic would demand that we believe in it.

The cross removes the obstacle existing in the nature (holiness and love) of God. This is the fundamental point in the words and concepts used in the Bible to describe the death of Christ and its effects. The cross was not only a DEMONSTRATION but was our SUBSTITUTION.
The reason for the words of Jesus "Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me. Nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will." It was the sins of man that sent Jesus to the cross.

[MIZ83]

Now, I'm not saying here that "original sin has now gone away" or anything like that.  Only asking you not to be so quick to dismiss HR's original question.

Romans 5:18-19 clearly says that, whatever the effects Adam's disobedience might have been on mankind, Jesus' obedience completely nullified it.  I don't think any would argue Jesus' obedience was not retroactive to the very beginning.

Reading the thread, this was the verse popping into my head, too. 

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.  For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

There is a repetition of "all men" and "the many" on both sides of the equation.  Whatever condemnation comes through Adam upon all men, it is counteracted through Christ for all men.  No one will be condemned for the sin of Adam.  Christ has delivered all men from that. 

vs. 16-17 "And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin.  For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ."

Where Christ's gift differs from Adam's transgression is that it brings justification in spite of many trespasses to those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift. 

Another example of Christ countering the effect of Adam's sin is given in 1 Cor 15:21-22.

"For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.  For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

We still feel the effects of Adam's sin, in that we live in a sinful world.  Christ has freed us from condemnation to death, however, both physical and spiritual, for Adam's sin.  His grace abounds even more for His people, for we are forgiven of our sins, as well.  Praise God for His gift!

[mclees8]

Now, I'm not saying here that "original sin has now gone away" or anything like that.  Only asking you not to be so quick to dismiss HR's original question.

Romans 5:18-19 clearly says that, whatever the effects Adam's disobedience might have been on mankind, Jesus' obedience completely nullified it.  I don't think any would argue Jesus' obedience was not retroactive to the very beginning.

Reading the thread, this was the verse popping into my head, too. 

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.  For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

There is a repetition of "all men" and "the many" on both sides of the equation.  Whatever condemnation comes through Adam upon all men, it is counteracted through Christ for all men.  No one will be condemned for the sin of Adam.  Christ has delivered all men from that. 

vs. 16-17 "And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin.  For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ."

Where Christ's gift differs from Adam's transgression is that it brings justification in spite of many trespasses to those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift. 

Another example of Christ countering the effect of Adam's sin is given in 1 Cor 15:21-22.

"For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.  For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

We still feel the effects of Adam's sin, in that we live in a sinful world.  Christ has freed us from condemnation to death, however, both physical and spiritual, for Adam's sin.  His grace abounds even more for His people, for we are forgiven of our sins, as well.  Praise God for His gift!

Why don't tell us what you think about this now personally. Does this mean to you that we are all set free from sin and forgiven no mater if one believes in the atonement of Christ or not. All  are under a blanket covering. We don't have to repent of sin and continue as we always have.

[MIZ83]

Now, I'm not saying here that "original sin has now gone away" or anything like that.  Only asking you not to be so quick to dismiss HR's original question.

Romans 5:18-19 clearly says that, whatever the effects Adam's disobedience might have been on mankind, Jesus' obedience completely nullified it.  I don't think any would argue Jesus' obedience was not retroactive to the very beginning.

Reading the thread, this was the verse popping into my head, too. 

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.  For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

There is a repetition of "all men" and "the many" on both sides of the equation.  Whatever condemnation comes through Adam upon all men, it is counteracted through Christ for all men.  No one will be condemned for the sin of Adam.  Christ has delivered all men from that. 

vs. 16-17 "And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin.  For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ."

Where Christ's gift differs from Adam's transgression is that it brings justification in spite of many trespasses to those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift. 

Another example of Christ countering the effect of Adam's sin is given in 1 Cor 15:21-22.

"For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.  For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

We still feel the effects of Adam's sin, in that we live in a sinful world.  Christ has freed us from condemnation to death, however, both physical and spiritual, for Adam's sin.  His grace abounds even more for His people, for we are forgiven of our sins, as well.  Praise God for His gift!

Why don't tell us what you think about this now personally. Does this mean to you that we are all set free from sin and forgiven no mater if one believes in the atonement of Christ or not. All  are under a blanket covering. We don't have to repent of sin and continue as we always have.

I'm sorry that I wasn't more clear in my language.  I'll just give some conclusions I draw.  Rather than remaining in physical death, resulting from the transgression of Adam, I will now be raised along with all men, and then face judgment.  Spiritually, rather than being condemned for Adam's sin, I am responsible for my own sins, for which Jesus also died.  Grace abounds, then, all the more because my transgressions, too, have been forgiven in turning from my old life and trusting in the blood of Christ for righteousness.  I believe I will be there with all the young children who have died because Jesus provided justification of life rather than condemnation in Adam.   

[mclees8]

Now, I'm not saying here that "original sin has now gone away" or anything like that.  Only asking you not to be so quick to dismiss HR's original question.

Romans 5:18-19 clearly says that, whatever the effects Adam's disobedience might have been on mankind, Jesus' obedience completely nullified it.  I don't think any would argue Jesus' obedience was not retroactive to the very beginning.

Reading the thread, this was the verse popping into my head, too. 

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.  For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

There is a repetition of "all men" and "the many" on both sides of the equation.  Whatever condemnation comes through Adam upon all men, it is counteracted through Christ for all men.  No one will be condemned for the sin of Adam.  Christ has delivered all men from that. 

vs. 16-17 "And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin.  For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ."

Where Christ's gift differs from Adam's transgression is that it brings justification in spite of many trespasses to those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift. 

Another example of Christ countering the effect of Adam's sin is given in 1 Cor 15:21-22.

"For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.  For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

We still feel the effects of Adam's sin, in that we live in a sinful world.  Christ has freed us from condemnation to death, however, both physical and spiritual, for Adam's sin.  His grace abounds even more for His people, for we are forgiven of our sins, as well.  Praise God for His gift!

Why don't tell us what you think about this now personally. Does this mean to you that we are all set free from sin and forgiven no mater if one believes in the atonement of Christ or not. All  are under a blanket covering. We don't have to repent of sin and continue as we always have.

I'm sorry that I wasn't more clear in my language.  I'll just give some conclusions I draw.  Rather than remaining in physical death, resulting from the transgression of Adam, I will now be raised along with all men, and then face judgment.  Spiritually, rather than being condemned for Adam's sin, I am responsible for my own sins, for which Jesus also died.  Grace abounds, then, all the more because my transgressions, too, have been forgiven in turning from my old life and trusting in the blood of Christ for righteousness.  I believe I will be there with all the young children who have died because Jesus provided justification of life rather than condemnation in Adam.   

As complicated as you seem to sound the plan of salvation is simple. We have all sinned and none are righteous. We are saved when we believe Jesus died and rose again to take away our sins so that we ourselves can walk in newness of life forsaking sin. His holy Spirit is our guide and resides in our hearts always guiding and convicting us our weaknesses.  It is just a matter of faith.    Sin exists in the world and it will until Jesus comes but we are set free from it because we believe Jesus set us free, but the unbelieving world is still condemned because they have not believed

[HRoberson]

I still haven't seen an explanation of just what the Redemption did.

If it is Original sin that keeps us separate from God, and if Jesus redeemed all people, why do we continue with the concept of original sin? If we are redeemed, how can we remain inherently separate?

What was the affect of redemption within Catholic soterology? If anything.

[mclees8]

I still haven't seen an explanation of just what the Redemption did.

If it is Original sin that keeps us separate from God, and if Jesus redeemed all people, why do we continue with the concept of original sin? If we are redeemed, how can we remain inherently separate?

What was the affect of redemption within Catholic soterology? If anything.

Jesus did not redeem all people. He only redeems those who will believe. Original sin is still in the world and all are still condemned by it until Jesus returns. Only those who have come to Christ are redeemed and the rest of the world is still condemned. The rest of your question makes no sense and I don't know what your hang up is about Catholics. I think you need to ask God about it. I said my two cents. Buy for mow pray you find what it is you are looking for.

[HRoberson]

I still haven't seen an explanation of just what the Redemption did.

If it is Original sin that keeps us separate from God, and if Jesus redeemed all people, why do we continue with the concept of original sin? If we are redeemed, how can we remain inherently separate?

What was the affect of redemption within Catholic soterology? If anything.

Jesus did not redeem all people. He only redeems those who will believe. Original sin is still in the world and all are still condemned by it until Jesus returns. Only those who have come to Christ are redeemed and the rest of the world is still condemned. The rest of your question makes no sense and I don't know what your hang up is about Catholics. I think you need to ask God about it. I said my two cents. Buy for mow pray you find what it is you are looking for.

You seem rather defensive and reactive. Did your mother spank you too much?

The Pope said that Jesus redeemed everyone, including atheists so from a Catholic perspective your assertion about limited redemption is spurious (assuming the Pope knows what he's talking about).

The rest of my question is written in proper English with accurate grammar, so I don't know why you can't understand it.

[MIZ83]

Now, I'm not saying here that "original sin has now gone away" or anything like that.  Only asking you not to be so quick to dismiss HR's original question.

Romans 5:18-19 clearly says that, whatever the effects Adam's disobedience might have been on mankind, Jesus' obedience completely nullified it.  I don't think any would argue Jesus' obedience was not retroactive to the very beginning.

Reading the thread, this was the verse popping into my head, too. 

"Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.  For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

There is a repetition of "all men" and "the many" on both sides of the equation.  Whatever condemnation comes through Adam upon all men, it is counteracted through Christ for all men.  No one will be condemned for the sin of Adam.  Christ has delivered all men from that. 

vs. 16-17 "And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin.  For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ."

Where Christ's gift differs from Adam's transgression is that it brings justification in spite of many trespasses to those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift. 

Another example of Christ countering the effect of Adam's sin is given in 1 Cor 15:21-22.

"For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead.  For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."

We still feel the effects of Adam's sin, in that we live in a sinful world.  Christ has freed us from condemnation to death, however, both physical and spiritual, for Adam's sin.  His grace abounds even more for His people, for we are forgiven of our sins, as well.  Praise God for His gift!

Why don't tell us what you think about this now personally. Does this mean to you that we are all set free from sin and forgiven no mater if one believes in the atonement of Christ or not. All  are under a blanket covering. We don't have to repent of sin and continue as we always have.

I'm sorry that I wasn't more clear in my language.  I'll just give some conclusions I draw.  Rather than remaining in physical death, resulting from the transgression of Adam, I will now be raised along with all men, and then face judgment.  Spiritually, rather than being condemned for Adam's sin, I am responsible for my own sins, for which Jesus also died.  Grace abounds, then, all the more because my transgressions, too, have been forgiven in turning from my old life and trusting in the blood of Christ for righteousness.  I believe I will be there with all the young children who have died because Jesus provided justification of life rather than condemnation in Adam.   

As complicated as you seem to sound the plan of salvation is simple. We have all sinned and none are righteous. We are saved when we believe Jesus died and rose again to take away our sins so that we ourselves can walk in newness of life forsaking sin. His holy Spirit is our guide and resides in our hearts always guiding and convicting us our weaknesses.  It is just a matter of faith.    Sin exists in the world and it will until Jesus comes but we are set free from it because we believe Jesus set us free, but the unbelieving world is still condemned because they have not believed

As complicated as I seem to sound?  I was responding to someone's comment on Romans 5 (not a simple text) as it relates to original sin in this thread.  I don't see how your reply is on topic.

[mclees8]

I still haven't seen an explanation of just what the Redemption did.

If it is Original sin that keeps us separate from God, and if Jesus redeemed all people, why do we continue with the concept of original sin? If we are redeemed, how can we remain inherently separate?

What was the affect of redemption within Catholic soterology? If anything.

Jesus did not redeem all people. He only redeems those who will believe. Original sin is still in the world and all are still condemned by it until Jesus returns. Only those who have come to Christ are redeemed and the rest of the world is still condemned. The rest of your question makes no sense and I don't know what your hang up is about Catholics. I think you need to ask God about it. I said my two cents. Buy for mow pray you find what it is you are looking for.

You seem rather defensive and reactive. Did your mother spank you too much?

The Pope said that Jesus redeemed everyone, including atheists so from a Catholic perspective your assertion about limited redemption is spurious (assuming the Pope knows what he's talking about).

The rest of my question is written in proper English with accurate grammar, so I don't know why you can't understand it.

What I stated is the truth the pope is dead wrong.  and I think you questioning here is nonsensical stuff posed to draw dialogue over questions that have no real value.  If all people were redeemed then there is no need for the judgment yet the Bible is clear that the unbelieving world is coming to judgment. Which concludes this useless dialogue.