Blackhawk
Monkey Boy
- Feb 5, 2002
- 4,930
- 73
- 52
- Faith
- Eastern Orthodox
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Originally posted by franklin
Hi BH, thanks for posting.... OS "seems" to be supported by scripture, however, it is not! I used to believe the same thing as you do about this doctrine until recently I have come to learn it is not biblical teaching. I'll try to cover as much as possible of what you have quoted as time allows me.
Okay. but I beliee that it is supported by scripture. However i will listen to you and why you think that it is not. I of course ask the same from you.
Oh yes, I used to believe this very same theory.... because Adam commited the first sin, the entire human race became contaminated with sin! That means that everyone born from Adam is now born with a depraved, sinful nature; I have recently come to learn that this is totally unsupported by scripture! It's false! It's an insult to God! If that is the case it's really God's fault that we sin because that is the way He created us! If that is the case then David wouldn't have written Psalm 51 pouring out his heart in repentance to God for his sinful, wicked deeds! You might as well tear that page out of your bible! [/B]
Yeah I wrestled with this awhile back. How can God condemn us for sin that we could not help doing? That is when we were depraved it was our nature to sin so why does God punish us for something we can't control.
first I want to say that God is just and fair. So if OS is in the Bible then it must be fair and just. Again I can't begin to convict or argue with God about how He has decided to run the universe. He is in control and I am not. However there are some theories as to why OS is just and right besides just saying that it is a mystery.
Some say like you that OS is just a myth. Others view it as that it is true and that not only did Adam sin for us but it was a sin with us. Now this second view requires some doctrine of preextience of souls so needless to say it is pretty bizarre.
But I believe the third view and that is that God made Adam our represenative. That what He did was what we would of done also. And since that is true we all fell because of the affects of his sin. Adam was the official represenative of the human race and he blew it but we would of also so ther is no injustice for God to allow the results of his sin, which is the disease called OS, to affect all man afterwrods. (except Jesus Christ of course)
But even if that theory is not right again if it is supported by scripture then it must be correct and fair and good. And really I have to trust God in that because His ways our higher than my own. So let's tacke the verses.
So BH, let's take a closer look at the passage you quoted from Rom5; it teaches that Adam's sin was not the sin of his descendants: "Them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression." This shows that Paul did not consider the sin of Adam to be their sin. Those who teach the doctrine of original sin mean that because Adam sinned, men are now born sinners; that is, they become sinners involuntarily (automatically) and necessarily by inheriting a sinful nature from Adam. [/B]
It teaches that Adam's sin was not the sin of his descendants? i guess that is true in a way. i did not sin with him like the second argument I said earlier describes. However I think Romans 5 is clear that the result of Adam's sin spread to all men.
How do you explain away this verse that clearly the sin spread to all men?
Rom 5:12
12 Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned--
(NAU)
And even more so how do you explain these verses that Adam's sin resulted in our condemnation and that because of his sin we were all made sinners as the Bible says below.
Rom 5:18-19
18 So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19 For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
(NAU)
To interpret the phrase, "made sinners" to mean that men are born sinners and become sinners involuntarily and necessarily by receiving a sinful nature from Adam, is a forced and inconsistent interpretation of this passage; for this passage not only says that all men are "made sinners" because of Adam's transgression, it also says that all men are "made righteous" by the obedience of Christ, and that the free gift of life "came upon all men" by Christ Jesus. So, for the advocates of the doctrine of original sin to arbitrarily give to the phrases "made sinners" and "came upon all men" the meaning of physical force and physical necessity when these phrases refer to Adam's sin, without giving the same meaning to them when they refer to Christ's righteousness, is once again an example of a forced and inconsistent interpretation dictated by a prepossessed belief in the doctrine of original sin. [/B]
hmm that is interesting however how did Adam's sin make me be condemmed? If I had no propensity to sin before I became a Christian then why did I do it? Also if it was just mild why can't some fight it off. For Romans 3 is very clear that mere human can not sin in their lifetime. It says that "no man seeks after God." So I feel that I have to say that Adam's sin gave me a propensity to sin and that it is strong enough to guarantee that i do sin.
Possibly others have more verses to proe original sin but I see with these verses that it is pretty clear.
Now I believe it says all in both places because God's death was enough to cover everyone's sin if they just put their faith in Christ. For in verse 17 Paul says that we must "...receive the grace and of the gift...." So we must be saved "by faith through grace." So I have no probelm with it saying all in both parts.
This brings me back to the original title of this thread, did Jesus sin? No he did not! He did not because Jesus was not born with a sinful nature and niether was any other human being born with a sinful nature. The difference between His birth and ours is that He was divinely begotten by the power of God in the womb of a virgin lady. Was it possible for Him to commit sin?; yes it was, however, because He totally submitted to the will of His father He lived the perfect sinless life in total submission to the will of God His father in heaven. He lived a sinless life as an example for us to follow. [/B]
No jesus was not born with a sinful nature. He was on par with Adam. But instead He chose not to sin when Adam chose to sin. That is why He is called the 2nd Adam.
And again, I can see your thinking might not be what is supported by scripture just like I used to think and believe just like you BH..... you kind of nailed it in the second part of this quote: yes, naturally we "might" not be able to totally obey God but through Christ and the power spirit of God and His word, we can now have the power and the knowledge to live a sin free life.[/B]
Okay. I do believe that it is possible for a Christian to stop sinning. Meaning that sin is not my master any longer God is my master. So I have power over all sins. However like I said before just because I do not have to sin does not mean that I will not. I know, although i do not like it, that I will sin. I do not excuse it. It does however show me ho gracious God is that even after He has freed me from sin and I still go back to my own vommit (sin) that He sttill forgave me even though He knew i would do it. So I label Christian perfection as a possible impossibility. is it possible sure. Is it going to happen no! why? Because our flesh is weak. Even though I do not have to sin I will still choose to sin until I am fully sanctified in Heaven. Although one of my goals is to not sin at all.
Do you think a person needs to know the scriptures in order to know right from wrong? I think your answer would be, of course not! It's just a natural part of the human being that tells him that it is wrong to go out an commit murder or whatever. What man ever needed the Scripture or religious instruction to know that it is wrong for someone to forcefully take what is not his? Do you need the Scripture to know that it is wrong for a person to insult you, lie about you, or abuse you in some way? Could any society convince itself through education that it is really right to hate, lie, steal, and murder or that it is wrong to love and do good to its neighbor? .[/B]
I do not need sripture to tell me all my wrongs no. However i do need scripture to illuminate my deepest sins. Also I desperately need the author of scriptre, God, to illuminate my heart to my faults and sins. For without His illumination I would not see Him. In fact without any of God's grace we would not only be totally depraved but utterly depraved (or as sinful as possible) no really i would not be around at all for God would of got rid of us a long time ago or we would all be in hell's torment.
I enjoy our discussions BH, and I would like to reply to more of your post but I am running out of time, so, maybe I can pick up on this later..... have a good day .[/B]
i enjoy our discussions also. I believe that I can learn from all sides of the fence. I might not agree with all but I listen and respect all people's opinions and try to find what God would have me learn from what they are saying.
Blackhawk
[/B][/QUOTE]
Upvote
0