Do These Verses Contradict Original Sin?

[Dale]

The Ten Commandments are given in Exodus Twenty and in Deuteronomy Five. Just before the Commandments are given in Exodus we find:

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,
punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
of those who hate me,
but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments
Exodus 20:5-6 NIV

In nearly identical words, just before the Commandments are given in Deuteronomy we find:

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,
punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,
but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Deuteronomy 5:9-10 NIV

“You shall not bow down” is a warning not to worship idols. Both verses say that God will not punish the innocent beyond the fourth generation. Yet the doctrine of original sin lays down that every child born is contaminated by the sin of Adam, or the sins of Adam and Eve. If God does not punish children for any sins of their ancestors beyond the fourth generation, we cannot be suffering for the mistakes of Adam and Eve.

There are two other passages in Exodus and Numbers that express the same thought.

And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness,
maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin.
Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished;
he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.”
Exodus 34:6-7 NIV

‘The LORD is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished;
he punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.’
Numbers 14:18 NIV

These verses collide with the conclusions reached by theologians who say that we are all under Original Sin. The Bible tells us that God never punishes the children beyond the fourth generation.

 

[Always in His Presence]

no

 

[KevinT]

The Ten Commandments are given in Exodus Twenty and in Deuteronomy Five. Just before the Commandments are given in Exodus we find:

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,
punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
of those who hate me,
but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments
Exodus 20:5-6 NIV

In nearly identical words, just before the Commandments are given in Deuteronomy we find:

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,
punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,
but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Deuteronomy 5:9-10 NIV

“You shall not bow down” is a warning not to worship idols. Both verses say that God will not punish the innocent beyond the fourth generation. Yet the doctrine of original sin lays down that every child born is contaminated by the sin of Adam, or the sins of Adam and Eve. If God does not punish children for any sins of their ancestors beyond the fourth generation, we cannot be suffering for the mistakes of Adam and Eve.

There are two other passages in Exodus and Numbers that express the same thought.

And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness,
maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin.
Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished;
he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.”
Exodus 34:6-7 NIV

‘The LORD is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished;
he punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.’
Numbers 14:18 NIV

These verses collide with the conclusions reached by theologians who say that we are all under Original Sin. The Bible tells us that God never punishes the children beyond the fourth generation.

I think that there are many analogies that can be used to consider how God is dealing with errant humanity. One such an allergy is a legal system, where every wrongdoing has to be “paid for“. An example of this was the old testament sanctuary system, where in sins were seemingly paid for through the blood of animal sacrifices.

I think this system works fairly well on a certain level, but as Paul later points out, the blood of animals can never remove the wrongdoing from our hearts.

And I think a very negative aspect that has come out of this, is a concept of Jesus paying off the Father for the sins of humanity. And we end up with a picture of God, the Father, as an angry God, and only appeased by the blood of His son. This is contrary to what Jesus told us, where in the Father himself loves us.

Clearly, the world around us is not ideal, not what God would want for us. So if we look at a chain of cause and effect, it can extend all the way back to Adam and Eve. And if we feel that we are suffering in this modern world, we can say we are suffering because of what Adam and Eve did. And in that sense we would be under the punishment because of our forefathers. I would argue that God allowing natural consequences to be carried out, could be seen as punishment by some, and not by others.

I am with you in that I don’t like a doctrine of original sin. I think many of these issues are simply analogies, which have then been extended farther than they should have.

Best wishes
KT

 

[eleos1954]

The Ten Commandments are given in Exodus Twenty and in Deuteronomy Five. Just before the Commandments are given in Exodus we find:

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,
punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation
of those who hate me,
but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments
Exodus 20:5-6 NIV

In nearly identical words, just before the Commandments are given in Deuteronomy we find:

You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God,
punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,
but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments.
Deuteronomy 5:9-10 NIV

“You shall not bow down” is a warning not to worship idols. Both verses say that God will not punish the innocent beyond the fourth generation. Yet the doctrine of original sin lays down that every child born is contaminated by the sin of Adam, or the sins of Adam and Eve. If God does not punish children for any sins of their ancestors beyond the fourth generation, we cannot be suffering for the mistakes of Adam and Eve.

There are two other passages in Exodus and Numbers that express the same thought.

And he passed in front of Moses, proclaiming, “The LORD, the LORD, the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness,
maintaining love to thousands, and forgiving wickedness, rebellion and sin.
Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished;
he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.”
Exodus 34:6-7 NIV

‘The LORD is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished;
he punishes the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation.’
Numbers 14:18 NIV

These verses collide with the conclusions reached by theologians who say that we are all under Original Sin. The Bible tells us that God never punishes the children beyond the fourth generation.

The Bible tells us that God never punishes the children beyond the fourth generation

No it doesn't. He visits everyone in all generations

It is a warning against perpetuating negative behaviors within a family line, where the consequences of a parent's actions can affect their descendants. How they are raised (the sin of the fathers)

Balance with Mercy:

While the Bible mentions the "visitation" of sins (acts committed) in future generations, it also emphasizes God's abundant mercy and forgiveness, particularly for those who repent and turn to Him.

Original Sin is the Christian teaching of mankind's sinfulness because of Adam's fall. It does not refer to the originating sin committed by Adam—(Gen 3:6)—but rather to mankind's moral and spiritual condition because of that sin. Original sin “is a sin 'contracted' and not 'committed'—a state of being and not an act” . Because of the fall the human race is born with a moral/spiritual "disease" ... that "disease" leads all to commit acts of sin .... we refer to this as our fallen nature ... that is ... it is natural for us to have (born with) moral/spiritual defects ... Jesus is the cure for the disease and will help us overcome our sinful nature (natural tendency to sin) that we are born with.

Since the fall ... We are born being separated from God ... this separation is our natural state of being since the fall.

Psalm 51:5: Humans are born into iniquity and sin, but we do not have to remain in it.

Jesus is the cure for the disease we are born with.

 

[Dale]

No it doesn't. He visits everyone in all generations

It is a warning against perpetuating negative behaviors within a family line, where the consequences of a parent's actions can affect their descendants. How they are raised (the sin of the fathers)

Balance with Mercy:

While the Bible mentions the "visitation" of sins (acts committed) in future generations, it also emphasizes God's abundant mercy and forgiveness, particularly for those who repent and turn to Him.

Original Sin is the Christian teaching of mankind's sinfulness because of Adam's fall. It does not refer to the originating sin committed by Adam—(Gen 3:6)—but rather to mankind's moral and spiritual condition because of that sin. Original sin “is a sin 'contracted' and not 'committed'—a state of being and not an act” . Because of the fall the human race is born with a moral/spiritual "disease" ... that "disease" leads all to commit acts of sin .... we refer to this as our fallen nature ... that is ... it is natural for us to have (born with) moral/spiritual defects ... Jesus is the cure for the disease and will help us overcome our sinful nature (natural tendency to sin) that we are born with.

Since the fall ... We are born being separated from God ... this separation is our natural state of being since the fall.

Psalm 51:5: Humans are born into iniquity and sin, but we do not have to remain in it.

Jesus is the cure for the disease we are born with.

You seem to think that I don’t understand original sin. What makes you think that I don’t understand it?

 

[Dale]

no

I think that there are many analogies that can be used to consider how God is dealing with errant humanity. One such an allergy is a legal system, where every wrongdoing has to be “paid for“. An example of this was the old testament sanctuary system, where in sins were seemingly paid for through the blood of animal sacrifices.

I think this system works fairly well on a certain level, but as Paul later points out, the blood of animals can never remove the wrongdoing from our hearts.

And I think a very negative aspect that has come out of this, is a concept of Jesus paying off the Father for the sins of humanity. And we end up with a picture of God, the Father, as an angry God, and only appeased by the blood of His son. This is contrary to what Jesus told us, where in the Father himself loves us.

Clearly, the world around us is not ideal, not what God would want for us. So if we look at a chain of cause and effect, it can extend all the way back to Adam and Eve. And if we feel that we are suffering in this modern world, we can say we are suffering because of what Adam and Eve did. And in that sense we would be under the punishment because of our forefathers. I would argue that God allowing natural consequences to be carried out, could be seen as punishment by some, and not by others.

I am with you in that I don’t like a doctrine of original sin. I think many of these issues are simply analogies, which have then been extended farther than they should have.

Best wishes
KT

No it doesn't. He visits everyone in all generations

It is a warning against perpetuating negative behaviors within a family line, where the consequences of a parent's actions can affect their descendants. How they are raised (the sin of the fathers)

Balance with Mercy:

While the Bible mentions the "visitation" of sins (acts committed) in future generations, it also emphasizes God's abundant mercy and forgiveness, particularly for those who repent and turn to Him.

Original Sin is the Christian teaching of mankind's sinfulness because of Adam's fall. It does not refer to the originating sin committed by Adam—(Gen 3:6)—but rather to mankind's moral and spiritual condition because of that sin. Original sin “is a sin 'contracted' and not 'committed'—a state of being and not an act” . Because of the fall the human race is born with a moral/spiritual "disease" ... that "disease" leads all to commit acts of sin .... we refer to this as our fallen nature ... that is ... it is natural for us to have (born with) moral/spiritual defects ... Jesus is the cure for the disease and will help us overcome our sinful nature (natural tendency to sin) that we are born with.

Since the fall ... We are born being separated from God ... this separation is our natural state of being since the fall.

Psalm 51:5: Humans are born into iniquity and sin, but we do not have to remain in it.

Jesus is the cure for the disease we are born with.

Have you ever noticed that there is no original sin in the Apostles Creed?

The Apostles’ Creed​

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to hell.
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic* church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

*that is, the true Christian church of all times and all places

Translation © 1988, Faith Alive Christian Resources. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide​

Source
https://www.bibles.net/the-full-text-of-the-apostles-creed/

 

[Dale]

no

I think that there are many analogies that can be used to consider how God is dealing with errant humanity. One such an allergy is a legal system, where every wrongdoing has to be “paid for“. An example of this was the old testament sanctuary system, where in sins were seemingly paid for through the blood of animal sacrifices.

I think this system works fairly well on a certain level, but as Paul later points out, the blood of animals can never remove the wrongdoing from our hearts.

And I think a very negative aspect that has come out of this, is a concept of Jesus paying off the Father for the sins of humanity. And we end up with a picture of God, the Father, as an angry God, and only appeased by the blood of His son. This is contrary to what Jesus told us, where in the Father himself loves us.

Clearly, the world around us is not ideal, not what God would want for us. So if we look at a chain of cause and effect, it can extend all the way back to Adam and Eve. And if we feel that we are suffering in this modern world, we can say we are suffering because of what Adam and Eve did. And in that sense we would be under the punishment because of our forefathers. I would argue that God allowing natural consequences to be carried out, could be seen as punishment by some, and not by others.

I am with you in that I don’t like a doctrine of original sin. I think many of these issues are simply analogies, which have then been extended farther than they should have.

Best wishes
KT

No it doesn't. He visits everyone in all generations

It is a warning against perpetuating negative behaviors within a family line, where the consequences of a parent's actions can affect their descendants. How they are raised (the sin of the fathers)

Balance with Mercy:

While the Bible mentions the "visitation" of sins (acts committed) in future generations, it also emphasizes God's abundant mercy and forgiveness, particularly for those who repent and turn to Him.

Original Sin is the Christian teaching of mankind's sinfulness because of Adam's fall. It does not refer to the originating sin committed by Adam—(Gen 3:6)—but rather to mankind's moral and spiritual condition because of that sin. Original sin “is a sin 'contracted' and not 'committed'—a state of being and not an act” . Because of the fall the human race is born with a moral/spiritual "disease" ... that "disease" leads all to commit acts of sin .... we refer to this as our fallen nature ... that is ... it is natural for us to have (born with) moral/spiritual defects ... Jesus is the cure for the disease and will help us overcome our sinful nature (natural tendency to sin) that we are born with.

Since the fall ... We are born being separated from God ... this separation is our natural state of being since the fall.

Psalm 51:5: Humans are born into iniquity and sin, but we do not have to remain in it.

Jesus is the cure for the disease we are born with.

Have you ever noticed that there is no original sin in the Nicene Creed?

The Nicene Creed​

We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven;
he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and was made human.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried.
The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again with glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of life.
He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
He spoke through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
and to life in the world to come. Amen.

Translation © 1988, Faith Alive Christian Resources. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.​

Source
https://www.bibles.net/the-full-text-of-the-nicene-creed/

 

[eleos1954]

You seem to think that I don’t understand original sin. What makes you think that I don’t understand it?

Do These Verses Contradict Original Sin?​

No the verses do not contradict Original sin.

This is an open forum some may or may not understand original sin .... others read these things ... we need to keep this in mind when posting.

 

[Always in His Presence]

Have you ever noticed that there is no original sin in the Nicene Creed?

The Nicene Creed​

We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven;
he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and was made human.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried.
The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again with glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of life.
He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
He spoke through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
and to life in the world to come. Amen.

Translation © 1988, Faith Alive Christian Resources. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.​

Source
https://www.bibles.net/the-full-text-of-the-nicene-creed/

That has nothing to do with your question.

The Nicene Creed is not Scripture

 

[The Liturgist]

no

Indeed, we are of one accord that these verses do not contradict original sin. This is the second time today you have made a theological post I enthusiastically agreed with Would you have believed two months ago my brother that it turns out we agree on so much?

+

Specifically, the denial of original sin is a component of Pelagianism, the ancient heresy taught by a citizen of the Western Roman province of Britannia, which teaches that we can affect our own salvation and which reduces the status of Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost, and indeed the Father in Heaven, to guides, by denying that God became incarnate in order to effect our salvation - rather, in Pelagianism, God in the person of the only begotten Son and Word became incarnate only so as to teach us how to save ourselves, which is entirely wrong, and likewise God in the person of the Holy Spirit descended only to guide us and not to assist our salvation, which is also entirely wrong.

This heresy was famously opposed by St. Augustine of Hippo, St. John Cassian, St. Celestine and St. Cyril the Great of Alexandria.

 

[Dale]

That has nothing to do with your question.

The Nicene Creed is not Scripture

There is no original sin in the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, or in the Athanasian Creed. The reason for this is simple. Christians did not believe in original sin at the time these creeds were composed. The earliest written copy of the Apostles Creed is from 341 AD, and the Nicene Creed was finalized in 381 AD.

You said that the Nicene Creed is not scripture. I am hearing very little scripture from those who believe in original sin. Everything I am hearing is church tradition. Here is some scripture.

3 All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be
4 through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race;
5 the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.
John 1:3-5 NAB

There is no original sin here. The Light shines in the darkness, but the darkness is a given, it did begin at any particular time or with any particular event.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Have you ever noticed that there is no original sin in the Apostles Creed?

The Apostles’ Creed​

I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.

I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit
and born of the virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
he descended to hell.
The third day he rose again from the dead.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty.
From there he will come to judge the living and the dead.

I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy catholic* church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.

*that is, the true Christian church of all times and all places

Translation © 1988, Faith Alive Christian Resources. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide​

Source
https://www.bibles.net/the-full-text-of-the-apostles-creed/

The Apostle’s Creed wasn’t about the nature of sin. The purpose of the ecumenical council was to settle the dispute about Christ’s deity between Arianism and Trinitarianism. There are a lot of doctrinal matters that aren’t mentioned in the Apostle’s Creed. The Eucharist, Baptism, the Sabbath and the Lord’s Day, Original Sin or Ancestral Sin, we could probably make a list of at least 50 or more doctrinal issues that aren’t mentioned in the Apostle’s Creed.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Indeed, we are of one accord that these verses do not contradict original sin. This is the second time today you have made a theological post I enthusiastically agreed with Would you have believed two months ago my brother that it turns out we agree on so much?

+

Specifically, the denial of original sin is a component of Pelagianism, the ancient heresy taught by a citizen of the Western Roman province of Britannia, which teaches that we can affect our own salvation and which reduces the status of Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost, and indeed the Father in Heaven, to guides, by denying that God became incarnate in order to effect our salvation - rather, in Pelagianism, God in the person of the only begotten Son and Word became incarnate only so as to teach us how to save ourselves, which is entirely wrong, and likewise God in the person of the Holy Spirit descended only to guide us and not to assist our salvation, which is also entirely wrong.

This heresy was famously opposed by St. Augustine of Hippo, St. John Cassian, St. Celestine and St. Cyril the Great of Alexandria.

Correct me if I’m mistaken brother but aren’t you an Orthodox believer and doesn’t the Orthodox Church actually teach Ancestral Sin which is somewhat semi-Pelagian instead of Original Sin? I mean Pelagian’s theology was an extremely radical theology with an extremist viewpoint on how we obtain salvation whereas many ideas about Original Sin are also extremist viewpoints on the opposite spectrum. It is my understanding that Ancestral Sin is more of an in between of these two polar extreme viewpoints.

 

[Dale]

The Apostle’s Creed wasn’t about the nature of sin. The purpose of the ecumenical council was to settle the dispute about Christ’s deity between Arianism and Trinitarianism. There are a lot of doctrinal matters that aren’t mentioned in the Apostle’s Creed. The Eucharist, Baptism, the Sabbath and the Lord’s Day, Original Sin or Ancestral Sin, we could probably make a list of at least 50 or more doctrinal issues that aren’t mentioned in the Apostle’s Creed.

You have the Apostles Creed mixed up with the Nicene Creed. The Apostles Creed did not come out of a Church Council. It is a brief summary of what Christians believed at that time. Considering that many Christians today put original sin near the center of Christianity, it is significant that it is not mentioned.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You have the Apostles Creed mixed up with the Nicene Creed. The Apostles Creed did not come out of a Church Council. It is a brief summary of what Christians believed at that time. Considering that many Christians today put original sin near the center of Christianity, it is significant that it is not mentioned.

Yep you’re absolutely right, sorry about that, my mistake. Thanks for pointing that out brother Dan. Another passage I would point out on the topic is Ezekiel 18. It directly explains that God does not punish the righteous for the sins of their fathers. Although I would say that this passage could be exclusively referring to the punishment of death and not other forms of punishment.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You have the Apostles Creed mixed up with the Nicene Creed. The Apostles Creed did not come out of a Church Council. It is a brief summary of what Christians believed at that time. Considering that many Christians today put original sin near the center of Christianity, it is significant that it is not mentioned.

Personally I don’t believe in the doctrine of original sin, at least not the reformed version of it. I think the extremist version of this doctrine is derived from people failing to understand that Romans 3:10-12 is a proverbial saying that is not intended to be taken literally.

 

[The Liturgist]

Correct me if I’m mistaken brother but aren’t you an Orthodox believer and doesn’t the Orthodox Church actually teach Ancestral Sin which is somewhat semi-Pelagian instead of Original Sin?

Ancestral sin is not “semi-Pelagian.” We anathematize Pelagianism and always have. Our refutation of Pelagius is based on the writings of St. John Cassian.

I must admit I find it exceedingly offensive when people refer to Orthodox soteriology as “semi-Pelagian.”

 

[The Liturgist]

Considering that many Christians today put original sin near the center of Christianity, it is significant that it is not mentioned.

Sorry, but that’s logically fallacious and historically inaccurate. The origin of the Apostles’ Creed as it is called is in early Western baptismal liturgy - it was never even used as a creed in the Eastern church at all.

Furthermore, even the Nicene Creed was never intended to summarize all Christian doctrine. Rather, it was intended to exclude certain specific heresies, particularly Arianism. And thus even when the Council of Ephesus anathematized Nestorianism, it did not modify the Nicene Creed to contain anti-Nestorian provisions, such as a confession that the Blessed Virgin Mary is Theotokos, rather, Ephesus enacted a canon that prohibited modifying the Nicene Creed or composing a new Creed.*

* The canonical prohibition against modifying the Nicene Creed is among the several reasons why the Orthodox reject the filioque.

 

[The Liturgist]

There is no original sin in the Apostles Creed, the Nicene Creed, or in the Athanasian Creed. The reason for this is simple. Christians did not believe in original sin at the time these creeds were composed. The earliest written copy of the Apostles Creed is from 341 AD, and the Nicene Creed was finalized in 381 AD.

Untrue. Both St. Augustine of Hippo and St. John Cassian were both very much alive at the time the Nicene Creed was finalized at the Second Ecumenical Synod in 381, and they led the rejection of the false doctrine taught by Pelagius.

Your idea that because the Creed does not mention a doctrine means that it was not at the time accepted is a logical fallacy, an argument from silence, and also is based on ahistorical assumptions.

Pelagianism is a toxic theology which was alien to the early church, which is contradicted by the writings of early church fathers such as St. Athanasius (see On The Incarnation and The Life of Anthony) and which is frankly dangerous.

Indeed when Nestorianism appeared, it was thought of as being among other things dangerous for an implied Christological Pelagianism. This was why St. Celestine rejected the doctrines of Nestorius as well as Pelagius (who had also been opposed by St. Cyril).

 

[BNR32FAN]

Ancestral sin is not “semi-Pelagian.” We anathematize Pelagianism and always have. Our refutation of Pelagius is based on the writings of St. John Cassian.

I must admit I find it exceedingly offensive when people refer to Orthodox soteriology as “semi-Pelagian.”

Well it was Army Matt that described it to me using the term. I can’t find the post, it was when I was new to CF back in 2017 or 2018. It was because of what Iranaeus wrote about God giving man the ability to choose both good and evil in Adversus Haereses. I was asking him about it because what Iranaeus wrote seemed a bit Pelagianist.

1. Man has received the knowledge of good and evil. It is good to obey God, and to believe in Him, and to keep His commandment, and this is the life of man; as not to obey God is evil, and this is his death. Since God, therefore, gave [to man] such mental power (magnanimitatem) man knew both the good of obedienceand the evil of disobedience, that the eye of the mind, receiving experience of both, may with judgment make choice of the better things; and that he may never become indolent or neglectful of God's command; and learning by experience that it is an evil thing which deprives him of life, that is, disobedience to God, may never attempt it at all, but that, knowing that what preserves his life, namely, obedience to God, is good, he may diligently keep it with all earnestness. Wherefore he has also had a twofold experience, possessing knowledge of both kinds, that with discipline he may make choice of the better things. But how, if he had no knowledge of the contrary, could he have had instruction in that which is good? For there is thus a surer and an undoubted comprehension of matters submitted to us than the mere surmise arising from an opinion regarding them. For just as the tongue receives experience of sweet and bitter by means of tasting, and the eye discriminates between black and white by means of vision, and the ear recognises the distinctions of sounds by hearing; so also does the mind, receiving through the experience of both the knowledgeof what is good, become more tenacious of its preservation, by acting in obedience to God: in the first place, casting away, by means of repentance, disobedience, as being something disagreeable and nauseous; and afterwards coming to understand what it really is, that it is contrary to goodness and sweetness, so that the mind may never even attempt to taste disobedience to God. But if any one do shun the knowledge of both these kinds of things, and the twofold perception of knowledge, he unawares divests himself of the character of a human being.



2. How, then, shall he be a God, who has not as yet been made a man? Or how can he be perfect who was but lately created? How, again, can he be immortal, who in his mortal nature did not obey his Maker? For it must be that you, at the outset, should hold the rank of a man, and then afterwards partake of the gloryof God. For you did not make God, but God you. If, then, you are God's workmanship, await the hand of your Maker which creates everything in due time; in due time as far as you are concerned, whose creation is being carried out. Offer to Him your heart in a soft and tractable state, and preserve the form in which the Creator has fashioned you, having moisture in yourself, lest, by becoming hardened, you lose the impressions of His fingers. But by preserving the framework you shall ascend to that which is perfect, for the moist clay which is in you is hidden [there] by the workmanship of God. His hand fashioned your substance; He will cover you over [too] within and without with pure gold and silver, and He will adorn you to such a degree, that even the King Himself shall have pleasure in your beauty. But if you, being obstinately hardened, reject the operation of His skill, and show yourself ungrateful towards Him, because you were created a [mere] man, by becoming thus ungrateful to God, you have at once lost both His workmanship and life. For creation is an attribute of the goodness of God but to be created is that of human nature. If then, you shall deliver up to Him what is yours, that is, faith towards Him and subjection, you shall receive His handiwork, and shall be a perfect work of God.



3. If, however, you will not believe in Him, and will flee from His hands, the causeof imperfection shall be in you who did not obey, but not in Him who called [you]. For He commissioned [messengers] to call people to the marriage, but they who did not obey Him deprived themselves of the royal supper. Matthew 22:3, etc. The skill of God, therefore, is not defective, for He has power of the stones to raise up children to Abraham; Matthew 3:9but the man who does not obtain it is the causeto himself of his own imperfection. Nor, [in like manner], does the light fail because of those who have blinded themselves; but while it remains the same as ever, those who are [thus] blinded are involved in darkness through their own fault. The light does never enslave any one by necessity; nor, again, does God exercise compulsion upon any one unwilling to accept the exercise of His skill. Those persons, therefore, who have apostatized from the light given by the Father, and transgressed the law of liberty, have done so through their own fault, since they have been created free agents, and possessed of power over themselves.



4. But God, foreknowing all things, prepared fit habitations for both, kindly conferring that light which they desire on those who seek after the light of incorruption, and resort to it; but for the despisers and mockers who avoid and turn themselves away from this light, and who do, as it were, blind themselves, He has prepared darkness suitable to persons who oppose the light, and He has inflicted an appropriate punishment upon those who try to avoid being subject to Him. Submission to God is eternal rest, so that they who shun the light have a place worthy of their flight; and those who fly from eternal rest, have a habitation in accordance with their fleeing. Now, since all good things are with God, they who by their own determination fly from God, do defraud themselves of all good things; and having been [thus] defrauded of all goodthings with respect to God, they shall consequently fall under the just judgment of God. For those persons who shun rest shall justly incur punishment, and those who avoid the light shall justly dwell in darkness. For as in the case of this temporal light, those who shun it do deliver themselves over to darkness, so that they do themselves become the cause to themselves that they are destitute of light, and do inhabit darkness; and, as I have already observed, the light is not the cause of such an [unhappy] condition of existence to them; so those who fly from the eternal light of God, which contains in itself all goodthings, are themselves the cause to themselves of their inhabiting eternaldarkness, destitute of all good things, having become to themselves the causeof [their consignment to] an abode of that nature.

St Iranaeus 170AD Adversus Haereses Book 4 Chapter 39