Do you believe in Original Sin?

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

Do you find the idea of "Original Sin" to be biblical and therefore believe in it?

I do not believe in original sin for a variety of reasons.

1. The Bible says that man is created upright. If mankind was born with sin, then he can't be upright.

2. The Bible says that man is sinful because man sins, not because Adam sins. While it is true that sin entered the world through Adam, this seems to be saying that before Adam ate of the tree, there was no sin, for there was no disobedience of God which results in sin.

3. The Bible says that a son doesn't bear the sins of the father, nor the father bear the sins of the son. That is, one isn't guilty of sin because his father sins. Original sin says that man is guilty because of Adam's sin in the Garden of Eden.

4. Original Sin is at odds with an Age of Accountability. So many people believe in an age of accountability, which is Biblical by the way, namely for the reasons related to the above about man being guilty because of his own sin, which equals disobedience, which comes by way of doing things against God's will. The Bible indicates that man becomes knowledgable of the truth in his youth, and is therefore guilty of sin at such a time.

To say that you believe in original sin is to say that Adam's sin gets passed from one generation to the next. However, an age of accountability argues that this sin being passed down takes a hiatus. That is, sin no longer exists, but later reappears.

5. Ultimately, the problem with Original Sin is that to believe in such taken to its conclusion would indicate that Jesus was born in sin, as the Bible says that he's both man and God. Since he is part of humanity, original sin would have to be passed down to Christ. However, we know Christ was sinless. He had no sin. Christ lived a sinless life because he did not sin. Therefore, logically, and matching up with God's Word, the Bible, Christ being sinless can only be scripturally sound if there is no such thing as original sin.

 

[BobRyan]

To say that you believe in original sin is to say that Adam's sin gets passed from one generation to the next. However, an age of accountability argues that this sin being passed down takes a hiatus. That is, sin no longer exists, but later reappears.

5. Ultimately, the problem with Original Sin is that to believe in such taken to its conclusion would indicate that Jesus was born in sin, as the Bible says that he's both man and God. Since he is part of humanity, original sin would have to be passed down to Christ. However, we know Christ was sinless. He had no sin. Christ lived a sinless life because he did not sin. Therefore, logically, and matching up with God's Word, the Bible, Christ being sinless can only be scripturally sound if there is no such thing as original sin.

It is true that original sin is false doctrine - babies are not held accountable for sins that Adam omitted.

But babies are born with a sinful nature - a bent to sin. That sinful nature is described in Rom 3:9-11 which means that babies need the gospel, the good news, a Savior -- and they have one according to 1John 2:2.

So the fact that babies can make no choice, and babies have no abstract constructs like law, and grace, forgiveness, obedience etc they are spiritually blind to that entire world. Christ said 'if you were blind you would have no sin".

James points out 'to him that knows to do right and does it not -- to him it is sin" that is covering for infants.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[pdudgeon]

yes, i believe in original sin. When Adam was created he was sinless. Eve, being made from Adam's rib, was also sinless.
However when Adam sinned the seed of all mankind was in his loins, and thus as sin changed both Adam and Eve,(both having been deceived by satan) so also it changed the seed in his loins, so that all future children inherited a sinful nature.

where you've mixed things up is in how you account for the sinless nature of Christ.

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

It is true that original sin is false doctrine - babies are not held accountable for sins that Adam omitted.

But babies are born with a sinful nature - a bent to sin. That sinful nature is described in Rom 3:9-11 which means that babies need the gospel, the good news, a Savior -- and they have one according to 1John 2:2.

So the fact that babies can make no choice, and babies have no abstract constructs like law, and grace, forgiveness, obedience etc they are spiritually blind to that entire world. Christ said 'if you were blind you would have no sin".

James points out 'to him that knows to do right and does it not -- to him it is sin" that is covering for infants.

in Christ,

Bob

All humans have a bent to sin, it is part of a sinful nature. This doesn't mean that a person is born with sin, however. Since God gives us free will we can choose to either live a life of righteousness or sin as followers of Christ.

Wouldn't you say that this bent to sin was also in Adam and Eve, for Adam disobeyed God's command?

Babies need the gospel as they grow because they will grow up and be held accountable. However, during infancy they are blameless before God.

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

yes, i believe in original sin. When Adam was created he was sinless. Eve, being made from Adam's rib, was also sinless.
However when Adam sinned the seed of all mankind was in his loins, and thus as sin changed both Adam and Eve,(both having been deceived by satan) so also it changed the seed in his loins, so that all future children inherited a sinful nature.

where you've mixed things up is in how you account for the sinless nature of Christ.

There was an original sin, but the belief of original sin says that all man is guilty because of Adam's sin.

The Bible says that mankind is guilty because of each person's sin.

 

[St_Worm2]

Hi GeorgiaGuy, you were correct in saying that God made man upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29; Genesis 1:26-27). But if that's really the case, and we are all born innocent/good and, especially, w/o a fallen nature, why does everyone sin ..

The Bible also tells us that a "good" tree cannot produce "bad" fruit (Matthew 7:18; Luke 6:43). So if we were all born "good", why do we all produce "bad" fruit? Why does everyone need a Savior (Romans 3:23; Romans 3:10-12; Ephesians 2:1-3) ..

Yours and His,
David

"Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful
from the time my mother conceived me"
Psalm 51:5​

 

[Rick Otto]

There was an original sin, but the belief of original sin says that all man is guilty because of Adam's sin.

The Bible says that mankind is guilty because of each person's sin.

That definition of original sin, I find faulty.

Man is sinful as a result of Adam sinning, but guilt is personal and doesn't occur until a conscience is violated.

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

Hi GeorgiaGuy, you were correct in saying that God made man upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29; Genesis 1:26-27). But if that's really the case, and we are all born innocent/good and, especially, w/o a fallen nature, why does everyone sin ..

The Bible also tells us that a "good" tree cannot produce "bad" fruit (Matthew 7:18; Luke 6:43). So if we were all born "good", why do we all produce "bad" fruit? Why does everyone need a Savior (Romans 3:23; Romans 3:10-12; Ephesians 2:1-3) ..

Yours and His,
David

"Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful
from the time my mother conceived me"
Psalm 51:5​

Why did Adam sin in the first place? It seems that the propensity to sin has existed since Adam, even before he actually sin. Thus, this "sinful nature" is part of nature of man, and God made man in such a manner that he could choose to obey God, or disobey God. After all, He gave us free will.

Man doesn't sin until he disobeys God. To disobey God, you have to understand God, something of which infants and young children do not have the capacity to understand. This is part of the reason that there is an age of accountability. However, if there is an age of accountability, it stands in stark contrast to original sin, for man is guilty at birth according to that concept. Original sin disregards the idea that man is not guilty of the father's sin.

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

That definition of original sin, I find faulty.

Man is sinful as a result of Adam sinning, but guilt is personal and doesn't occur until a conscience is violated.

Mankind was cursed with death because of Adam's sin. That doesn't mean that mankind sins because Adam sinned.

Sin entered the world because prior to Adam sinning, there never had been committed a sin. That's what it means, at least to me, that sin entered the world when Adam sinned, for if the sinful nature is the result of Adam, why in the world did Adam have the propensity of a "sinful nature" to begin with, before his actual sin?

 

[GeorgiaGuyinAtlanta]

Hi GeorgiaGuy, you were correct in saying that God made man upright (Ecclesiastes 7:29; Genesis 1:26-27). But if that's really the case, and we are all born innocent/good and, especially, w/o a fallen nature, why does everyone sin ..

The Bible also tells us that a "good" tree cannot produce "bad" fruit (Matthew 7:18; Luke 6:43). So if we were all born "good", why do we all produce "bad" fruit? Why does everyone need a Savior (Romans 3:23; Romans 3:10-12; Ephesians 2:1-3) ..

Yours and His,
David

"Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful
from the time my mother conceived me"
Psalm 51:5​

Also, regarding the Psalm passage, it must mean a "sinful nature", not actually being sinful, for the Bible indicates that man doesn't commit sin until he has the knowledge of right from wrong. A baby, especially at the blastocyst level, is incapable of knowledge, as the brain has yet to be formed.

To be consistent, you have to argue that if original sin is true, then Jesus would inherit that sin, since Jesus was both fully God and fully man. The Bible indicates such. Since we know that Jesus was the only sinless man that ever lived, the only way this is possible is if there is no such thing as original sin, for original sin condemns man for not sinning.

 

[Albion]

I think the issue turns on this point:

Are any humans "good" and deserving of salvation in the absence of whatever you think justifies men before God (Faith, Grace, Works, etc.)? I'd say 'No."

That is to say 'Yes' to the question of the reality of Original Sin. We can discuss the fine points of a definition later.

 

[fhansen]

Do you find the idea of "Original Sin" to be biblical and therefore believe in it?

I do not believe in original sin for a variety of reasons.

1. The Bible says that man is created upright. If mankind was born with sin, then he can't be upright.

2. The Bible says that man is sinful because man sins, not because Adam sins. While it is true that sin entered the world through Adam, this seems to be saying that before Adam ate of the tree, there was no sin, for there was no disobedience of God which results in sin.

3. The Bible says that a son doesn't bear the sins of the father, nor the father bear the sins of the son. That is, one isn't guilty of sin because his father sins. Original sin says that man is guilty because of Adam's sin in the Garden of Eden.

4. Original Sin is at odds with an Age of Accountability. So many people believe in an age of accountability, which is Biblical by the way, namely for the reasons related to the above about man being guilty because of his own sin, which equals disobedience, which comes by way of doing things against God's will. The Bible indicates that man becomes knowledgable of the truth in his youth, and is therefore guilty of sin at such a time.

To say that you believe in original sin is to say that Adam's sin gets passed from one generation to the next. However, an age of accountability argues that this sin being passed down takes a hiatus. That is, sin no longer exists, but later reappears.

5. Ultimately, the problem with Original Sin is that to believe in such taken to its conclusion would indicate that Jesus was born in sin, as the Bible says that he's both man and God. Since he is part of humanity, original sin would have to be passed down to Christ. However, we know Christ was sinless. He had no sin. Christ lived a sinless life because he did not sin. Therefore, logically, and matching up with God's Word, the Bible, Christ being sinless can only be scripturally sound if there is no such thing as original sin.

Past teachings on OS maintain that Adam's descendants are not guilty of committing the sin but carry its effects with them nonetheless, the chief of which is simply separation from God. An associated effect is a certain division within themselves. Man was made for communion with God; he cannot maintain perfect integrity without that relationship. And yet it should be obvious that integrity-wholeness-is missing to a great degree in this world; sin abounds. And it should likewise be obvious that we're born without the knowledge of God, without this communion which the doctrine of OS asserts was the original and right manner of things.

In any case, something's wrong with this world-with the affairs of human beings. And Jesus came to set that right, to reconcile man with God, to reveal the Father to us, so we may regain that knowledge, that union. We're "born dead", so to speak, in need of being born again.

 

[James Is Back]

If there is no original sin what was the point of the virgin birth?

 

[Albion]

If there is no original sin what was the point of the virgin birth?

The virgin birth didn't sidestep the problem of OS. God cannot know sin, so Christ would have been sinless in any case.

 

[fhansen]

The virgin birth didn't sidestep the problem of OS. God cannot know sin, so Christ would have been sinless in any case.

Yes, the virgin birth has to do with the fact that Jesus is begotten by the Father, no human father involved, and as such is the perfect union of God and man.

 

[Cappadocious]

Are any humans "good" and deserving of salvation

What would it mean to deserve salvation?

 

[fhansen]

I think the issue turns on this point:

Are any humans "good" and deserving of salvation in the absence of whatever you think justifies men before God (Faith, Grace, Works, etc.)? I'd say 'No."

That is to say 'Yes' to the question of the reality of Original Sin. We can discuss the fine points of a definition later.

But at the same time are humans, fallen yet created in the image of God, so bad that they eternal torment?

 

[Albion]

But at the same time are humans, fallen yet created in the image of God, so bad that they eternal torment?

Yes.

But of course, the question goes more to the nature of God than to that of Man. In principle, if the Creator judges his creation as unworthy, he is entitled to do whatever he wants with him.

 

[Albion]

What would it mean to deserve salvation?

To be seen by God as righteous.

 

[fhansen]

To be seen by God as righteous.

Yes, because we are righteous at justification-and must maintain that righteousness into heaven.