Original Sin, I was wrong.

[Handmaid for Jesus]

Adam was created in the image of God, but he lost that image when He sin.So, when he began to procreate, his offspring was born in his own corupt(mortal) image.

Gen.5: 1 This is the written account of Adam’s family line.

When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind”[a] when they were created. 3When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.

 

[holyrokker]

Adam was created in the image of God, but he lost that image when He sin.So, when he began to procreate, his offspring was born in his own corupt(mortal) image.

Gen.5: 1 This is the written account of Adam’s family line.

When God created mankind, he made them in the likeness of God. 2 He created them male and female and blessed them. And he named them “Mankind”[a] when they were created. 3When Adam had lived 130 years, he had a son in his own likeness, in his own image; and he named him Seth. 4 After Seth was born, Adam lived 800 years and had other sons and daughters. 5 Altogether, Adam lived a total of 930 years, and then he died.

I agree with your assessment that we are born mortal.

 

[Marshall Janzen]

Christos,


You can read about the people on the NIV translation committee HERE. They are substantive evangelical scholars.

Sincerely, Spencer

Interestingly, they translate sarx more literally in the NIV 2010 update. There's even mention of it at the site you referenced in their translators' notes:

Most occurrences of ‟sinful nature” have become ‟flesh.” Especially in Paul, sarx can mean either part or all of the human body or the human being under the power of sin. In an effort to capture this latter sense of the word, the original NIV often rendered sarx as ‟sinful nature.” But this expression can mislead readers into thinking the human person is made up of various compartments, one of which is sarx, whereas the biblical writers’ point is that humans can choose to yield themselves to a variety of influences or powers, one of which is the sin-producing sarx. The updated NIV uses ‟flesh” as the translation in many places where it is important for readers to decide for themselves from the context whether one or both of these uses of sarx is present.

 

[Assyrian]

Does that mean they still leave some verses sinful nature?

 

[Marshall Janzen]

Often they still have a footnote, and I guess there are still some verses that use the more interpretive wording. You can check it out by using BibleGateway, as they have the 2010 version as well as the older one. Here's a link to Ephesians 2:3.

 

[grabsuccess]

Adam was created in the image of God, but he lost that image when He sin.So, when he began to procreate, his offspring was born in his own corupt(mortal) image.

Original sin started long before Adam and Eve, namely Satan. The anointed Cherub Lucifer through pride wanted to erect a throne above his Creator and be worshiped in his place. How arrogant is that?

http://www.faithclipart.com/guide/christian-ministries/angels/lucifer-the-fallen-angel.html

""Lucifer is one of three archangels mentioned in Scripture. He was created by God just as all angels were, but his role was different from the other angelic hosts. Lucifer was referred to as the 'covering angel.' Just as the cherubim covered the mercy seat of the Ark of the Covenant, Lucifer was established by God to be the angel of worship, one whose ministry surrounded the heart of heaven. Lucifer was created to dwell eternally in the throne room of heaven, in the very presence of God (Ezekiel 28:14).

According to Ezekiel 28:13, a probable reference to Lucifer, we learn that he is an amazing being to behold: "You were the seal of perfection, full of wisdom and perfect in beauty. You were in Eden, the garden of God; every precious stone was your covering: the sardius, topaz, and diamond, beryl, onyx, and jasper, sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold. The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes was prepared for you on the day you were created.""

As soon as Satan fell with a 1/3 of other angels he determined then to thwart all of God's plans, including the plans God had for man.

Yes the original sin is usually attributed to Adam and Eve, but Satan is the one that convinced them that God was hiding knowledge that would make them like gods, knowing good and evil and that they would not die.

I don't fault Adam and Eve as much knowing that even a 1/3 of the angels in heaven were subject to his lies. How he accomplished this against God, their Creator, seems to me unfathomable but it happened.

 

[imacman9]

Some Christians (those adhering to Reformed Theology) incorrectly believe that all people inherit the judgment, consequences, guilt, sin tendencies and/or curse of the sin that Adam committed. The Bible verse most often used to promote this false doctrine is Romans 5:12:

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...

From this verse, it often has been taught that through Adam's sin, every descendant of Adam-that is, every human being-inherits sin, guilt and/or an evil nature.

Look carefully at this verse and see what it actually says. Is sin passed on to every person because of Adam's sin? I emphatically say, "No!"

What this verse tells us is that sin "entered into the world" because of Adam's sin. In the original Greek language in which our New Testament was written, we are told that sin entered into the cosmos, that is, the world. The Bible does not say that sin entered into the inherited nature of mankind.

If we go back to study Church history, we easily can find out where people got the wrong interpretation of Romans 5:12. Augustine (354-430 A.D.) is most known for his teaching that sin entered into every human being because of Adam's sin. When we go back to follow his reasoning, we find that he was using a Latin translation of the New Testament, rather than the original manuscripts which were written and transcribed in Greek. Even though Augustine was a very influential Christian leader, he never learned to read Greek. In his Latin translation of Romans 5:12, the last phrase says in quo omnes peccaverunt. This means "in whom all have sinned." If Augustine's translation had been accurate, then, indeed, it could mean that all people sin in Adam. However, his Latin translation was incorrect.

What Romans 5:12 actually tells us in the original Greek language is "because all sinned." Therefore, we did not all sin in Adam. Romans 5:12 tells us that sin entered the cosmos, and not the inherited nature of man.

First John 2:16 tells us where sin abides:
For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.

Sin abides in the world, that is, the cosmos.

Of course, we know that all people yield to the sin which is in the world. Therefore, the sin which is in the cosmos becomes active in in their lives, too. As we associate with people, the sin which influences them acts upon each of us. Sin, therefore, works through their lives--that is, through the lives of our parents, friends, teachers, leaders, entertainers, movie makers, etc. We are vulnerable to the sin which is active in the world and in the people around us. Yes, sin is a powerful force. Every human being submits at some time during his or her life.

The main point is this: Man is not born sinful; however, he is vulnerable, and, therefore, becomes sinful.

 

[Assyrian]

Good post imacman. I agree with almost everything you say, though I wonder if you are treating abstractions 'in the world' 'sin abides' as though it were a literal place. It is not a problems, metaphors still work if you treat them that way, just something to think about.

Welcome to the forum imacman.

 

[golgotha61]

"What Romans 5:12 actually tells us in the original Greek language is "because all sinned." Therefore, we did not all sin in Adam. Romans 5:12 tells us that sin entered the cosmos, and not the inherited nature of man."



Romans 5:12 So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all people because all sinned.

There is no mention of cosmos here nor is there any reason to interpret that concept, the verse is referring to sin entering the whole human race.

There is a book by M. R. Dehaan called the Chemistry of The Blood, that explains why sin had to enter through man. It supports the theology of mankind being "seminally" present in Adam when he sinned.

 

[Assyrian]

"What Romans 5:12 actually tells us in the original Greek language is "because all sinned." Therefore, we did not all sin in Adam. Romans 5:12 tells us that sin entered the cosmos, and not the inherited nature of man."

Romans 5:12 So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all people because all sinned.

There is no mention of cosmos here nor is there any reason to interpret that concept, the verse is referring to sin entering the whole human race.

Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man...
Rom 5:12 δια τουτο ωσπερ δι ενος ανθρωπου η αμαρτια εις τον κοσμον εισηλθεν... The word translated world here is actually the Greek kosmos. imacman9 was right, Romans 5:12 does not describe sin spreading to the human race from Adam's sin, but death spreading to the human race because we all sinned too.

 

[golgotha61]

Rom 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man...
Rom 5:12 δια τουτο ωσπερ δι ενος ανθρωπου η αμαρτια εις τον κοσμον εισηλθεν... The word translated world here is actually the Greek kosmos. imacman9 was right, Romans 5:12 does not describe sin spreading to the human race from Adam's sin, but death spreading to the human race because we all sinned too.

imacman9 said the cosmos and I understood that to mean the universe, am I wrong? If so, I apologize. If not and the interpretation is the universe, then it is not correct. Sin can only spread to and through beings, not inanimate objects. The Greek word Kosmos has more than one meaning and the meaning here should be mankind.
However, death did enter the human race and that is the point I was trying to make (poorly I guess). Death which is the wage of sin entered the human race because we were seminally present with Adam when he sinned. Death does not spread to the rest of the human race based on our sin only Adam's.

 

[Assyrian]

imacman9 said the cosmos and I understood that to mean the universe, am I wrong? If so, I apologize. If not and the interpretation is the universe, then it is not correct. Sin can only spread to and through beings, not inanimate objects. The Greek word Kosmos has more than one meaning and the meaning here should be mankind.

I tend to interpret it simply as the world, as you say kosmos has a wide range of meanings, but if mankind is in the world, and man commits the first sin, then sin is in the world for the first time too. I think the cosmological interpretation is interesting though, after all, in chapter 8 Paul goes on to talk of all creation sharing in our adoption as the son.

I think the problem you are having with Rom 5:12 is you are not looking at what went where. Paul doesn't say sin spread through the cosmos. He say it is death that spread, and it spread to all men because all sinned. So death is only spreading through the human race, and does so because each one of us sins. Interestingly though, for our discussion, the word used for death spreading through the human race is dierchomai which describes a geographical spread, travelling through a region. So the imagery Paul is using doesn't limit kosmos to the human race, but is looking at where the human race is found.

However, death did enter the human race and that is the point I was trying to make (poorly I guess). Death which is the wage of sin entered the human race because we were seminally present with Adam when he sinned. Death does not spread to the rest of the human race based on our sin only Adam's.

That is how people have tried to explain the passage, but it is not what Paul says ...death spread to all men because all sinned Rom 5:12.

 

[golgotha61]

I tend to interpret it simply as the world, as you say kosmos has a wide range of meanings, but if mankind is in the world, and man commits the first sin, then sin is in the world for the first time too. I think the cosmological interpretation is interesting though, after all, in chapter 8 Paul goes on to talk of all creation sharing in our adoption as the son.

I think the problem you are having with Rom 5:12 is you are not looking at what went where. Paul doesn't say sin spread through the cosmos. He say it is death that spread, and it spread to all men because all sinned. So death is only spreading through the human race, and does so because each one of us sins. Interestingly though, for our discussion, the word used for death spreading through the human race is dierchomai which describes a geographical spread, travelling through a region. So the imagery Paul is using doesn't limit kosmos to the human race, but is looking at where the human race is found.


That is how people have tried to explain the passage, but it is not what Paul says ...death spread to all men because all sinned Rom 5:12.

Yes and the explanation then is "because all sinned" through Adam, which in my opinion also accounts for the sin nature since man cannot not sin. Since the past tense is used here "because all sinned" as opposed to all will sin, I interpret that the offense has already taken place through Adam. The reasoning here is if death is only because of our personal sin then it does not explain the death of babies, this is better accounted for with the "imputation" doctrine. Death is imputed to the human race apart from individual sin. My understanding is better satisfied with the "seminally" present theology, but I appreciate the dialogue.

 

[Assyrian]

Yes and the explanation then is "because all sinned" through Adam, which in my opinion also accounts for the sin nature since man cannot not sin.

It isn't just your explanation, it is one that has been around in the church since the time of Augustine. The problem is, it isn't what Paul says.

The reasoning here is if death is only because of our personal sin then it does not explain the death of babies,

It pretty much depends on what sort of death Paul is talking about. If it was physical death why did Paul tell the Ephesians, Eph 2:1 you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked. These are people how were still physically alive when he wrote the letter. It isn't physical death they were dead in. And notice how it was their own sins they were dead in, not Adam's? They were dead in the sins in which they once walked. Or look in Romans 7 where Paul describes how he died when he first sinned. Rom 7:9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. Not only did this death come when he sinned just like he describes in Roman 5:12 and death spread to young Saul because Saul sinned, we also see that he was alive before his happened. If he had died as a baby before he sinned it would only have been physical death, not the spiritual death he died when he first sinned.

this is better accounted for with the "imputation" theology. Death is imputed to the human race apart from individual sin. My understanding is better satisfied with the "seminally" present theology, but I appreciate the dialogue.

It is good to talk I can see the attraction of a theology that seems explains so much, the problem is, I don't think it is what scripture actually says.

 

[holyrokker]

Yes and the explanation then is "because all sinned" through Adam, which in my opinion also accounts for the sin nature since man cannot not sin. Since the past tense is used here "because all sinned" as opposed to all will sin, I interpret that the offense has already taken place through Adam. The reasoning here is if death is only because of our personal sin then it does not explain the death of babies, this is better accounted for with the "imputation" doctrine. Death is imputed to the human race apart from individual sin. My understanding is better satisfied with the "seminally" present theology, but I appreciate the dialogue.

But the is no reason to add "in Adam" to the clause "all have sinned".

Jesus said That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'

To live a spiritual life, we need to be born of the Spirit. To remain undeceived by sin, we need the Holy Spirit. Yet, we are born flesh. At birth we have no connection to the Spirit. For that reason, sin is unavoidable. It isn't that we have a "sinful nature".

 

[golgotha61]

But the is no reason to add "in Adam" to the clause "all have sinned".

Jesus said That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, 'You must be born again.'

To live a spiritual life, we need to be born of the Spirit. To remain undeceived by sin, we need the Holy Spirit. Yet, we are born flesh. At birth we have no connection to the Spirit. For that reason, sin is unavoidable. It isn't that we have a "sinful nature".

There is a reason to add "in Adam" since the "the wages of sin is death", both physical and spiritual, and death entered by one man, therefore death entered by Adam. Verses 14, 17,18, and 19 all point to Adam, so I believe he needs to be object of "all have sinned". Also I believe since the phrase "all have sinned" points to the past and not the present or future, it points to Adam's sin.


I also believe in the "total depravity of man" and the fact that man cannot not sin. This I believe is the "sin nature", it is man's natural behavior to sin until his dead spirit is regenerated by the Holy Spirit (born again).

 

[Zeena]

*snip*
I also believe in the "total depravity of man" and the fact that man cannot not sin. This I believe is the "sin nature", it is man's natural behavior to sin until his dead spirit is regenerated by the Holy Spirit (born again).

Was Jesus 'born again'?

Heb 12:7
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

 

[Assyrian]

There is a reason to add "in Adam" since the "the wages of sin is death", both physical and spiritual, and death entered by one man, therefore death entered by Adam.

The issue in Rom 5:12 is how the death got from that one man to us, which Paul tells us is the same way death came to Adam (because he sinned) and death comes to us the same way because we all sin too. The wage of sin is death doesn't help, if we simply had death passed down to us because of Adam's sin then death wouldn't wages but an inheritance. Paul was talking about the results of our sin when he said that.
Rom 6:20 When you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness.
21 But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? The end of those things is death.
22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life.
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Verses 14, 17,18, and 19 all point to Adam,

Because Paul is using Adam as an illustration of Christ and the cross, but that doesn't mean we can make up our own explanation of what happened with Adam's sin and ignore what Paul actually tell us.

so I believe he needs to be object of "all have sinned". Also I believe since the phrase "all have sinned" points to the past and not the present or future, it points to Adam's sin.

I don't think the past tense helps you because Paul is quite happy to describe the entire human race and say we have all sinned Rom 3:23 all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. This is of course speaking generally about the human race, when we look at the individual as Paul tell us about himself, as children we were once alive before we understood what sin is, but when we understood what sin was and the difference between right and wrong we all sinned. At the same time Paul describes the death that that comes from sin as a present tense ongoing process, 1Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die. This sinning and dying spiritually in our sin is an ongoing process.

Worth pointing where the idea came from that we all sinned in Adam. It is from Romans 5:12, but Augustine's Latin translation, which instead of saying ...death spread to all men because all sinned, was translated in quo omnes peccaverunt, 'in whom (or in which) all sinned', and the 'in whom' was taken as Adam. And so the idea took a deep root in the church and in our understanding of sin. By the time we left the Latin bible and got back to the Greek, and realised the Romans 2:12 doesn't say in whom all sinned, the idea had a deep root in our theology and our understanding of Paul, and commentator just keep reading the idea into passages that say nothing about us sinning in Adam. For example Gill takes Rom 3:23 All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and says "All have sinned in Adam". PNT, The People's New Testament, takes Romans 5:12 and says "For that all have sinned: The personal sins of responsible persons are not now spoken of, but all the race sinned in Adam..." But such a major claim really needs to be backed up by a clear statement that we have all sinned in Adam and not simply read into back into texts that don't say anything of the sort.

I also believe in the "total depravity of man" and the fact that man cannot not sin. This I believe is the "sin nature", it is man's natural behavior to sin until his dead spirit is regenerated by the Holy Spirit (born again).

And the bible does teach clearly as we have seen that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. However I don't think it helps our understanding of this to read explanations back into scripture rather than basing or understanding on what scripture actually says. Or at least if we do, we need to recognise these ideas are speculative and keep then separate in our minds from what the text actually say.

 

[golgotha61]

Was Jesus 'born again'?

Heb 12:7
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.

Jesus was not born of man but of woman. He is always referred to in the New Testament as the "son of Mary". Christ did not have the sin nature since it is only passed on by the man.

 

[golgotha61]

The issue in Rom 5:12 is how the death got from that one man to us, which Paul tells us is the same way death came to Adam (because he sinned) and death comes to us the same way because we all sin too. The wage of sin is death doesn't help, if we simply had death passed down to us because of Adam's sin then death wouldn't wages but an inheritance. Paul was talking about the results of our sin when he said that.
Rom 6:20 When you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness.
21 But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? The end of those things is death.
22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life.
23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.



Because Paul is using Adam as an illustration of Christ and the cross, but that doesn't mean we can make up our own explanation of what happened with Adam's sin and ignore what Paul actually tell us.

I don't think the past tense helps you because Paul is quite happy to describe the entire human race and say we have all sinned Rom 3:23 all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. This is of course speaking generally about the human race, when we look at the individual as Paul tell us about himself, as children we were once alive before we understood what sin is, but when we understood what sin was and the difference between right and wrong we all sinned. At the same time Paul describes the death that that comes from sin as a present tense ongoing process, 1Cor 15:22 For as in Adam all die. This sinning and dying spiritually in our sin is an ongoing process.

Worth pointing where the idea came from that we all sinned in Adam. It is from Romans 5:12, but Augustine's Latin translation, which instead of saying ...death spread to all men because all sinned, was translated in quo omnes peccaverunt, 'in whom (or in which) all sinned', and the 'in whom' was taken as Adam. And so the idea took a deep root in the church and in our understanding of sin. By the time we left the Latin bible and got back to the Greek, and realised the Romans 2:12 doesn't say in whom all sinned, the idea had a deep root in our theology and our understanding of Paul, and commentator just keep reading the idea into passages that say nothing about us sinning in Adam. For example Gill takes Rom 3:23 All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God and says "All have sinned in Adam". PNT, The People's New Testament, takes Romans 5:12 and says "For that all have sinned: The personal sins of responsible persons are not now spoken of, but all the race sinned in Adam..." But such a major claim really needs to be backed up by a clear statement that we have all sinned in Adam and not simply read into back into texts that don't say anything of the sort.

And the bible does teach clearly as we have seen that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. However I don't think it helps our understanding of this to read explanations back into scripture rather than basing or understanding on what scripture actually says. Or at least if we do, we need to recognise these ideas are speculative and keep then separate in our minds from what the text actually say.

I appreciate your thought progression but I don't hold the same conclusion. The seminally present doctrine makes more sense to me in the whole scheme of hamartiology, for instance, the death of babies. Since death is the result of sin and a newborn can have no opportunity or even the understanding of right and wrong, the imputation of death is the only logical explanation.

As far as your critique of the "wages of sin is death" postulation as a viable explanation for imputed sin, I believe there is no problem with inheriting someone else's reward for their labor.

Again, we differ but that is alright. I do enjoy the discussion.