original sin

[Imblessed]

Ok, was was over in the baptist, anabaptist section. THere was a thread about original sin that caught my interest.

What's the general view of original sin--in basic laymen's terms if you will--according to a reformed believer?

Are we guilty, literally, of adam's original sin? It seemed to me that they believe that Calvinist believe we are literally guilty of his sin's also. I had always thought that we are guilty of our own sins, but his orginal sin caused everyone born to be born bent totally away from God.

You may have to go to the baptist room to read that thread, I'll try to link it in here somehow. It may explain my confusion a bit.

I'm having trouble clarifying.....

 

[Imblessed]

Ok, I can't figure out how to link it, my copy/paste isn't working....arggghhh.
anyway, it's over there....

 

[cygnusx1]

Ok, was was over in the baptist, anabaptist section. THere was a thread about original sin that caught my interest.

What's the general view of original sin--in basic laymen's terms if you will--according to a reformed believer?

Are we guilty, literally, of adam's original sin? It seemed to me that they believe that Calvinist believe we are literally guilty of his sin's also. I had always thought that we are guilty of our own sins, but his orginal sin caused everyone born to be born bent totally away from God.

You may have to go to the baptist room to read that thread, I'll try to link it in here somehow. It may explain my confusion a bit.

I'm having trouble clarifying.....

a man is not merely viewed as an individual by God , but as a Creature , a being , a world............. we are either IN Adam or in Christ .
Now consider carefully Paul's arguement about DEATH reigning BEFORE the Law was given , the implication is explicitly made clear , we were IN Adam and sinned WITH him in Eden Romans 5:12......... so death reigned even from Adam to Moses (before the Law made it a Judicial binding contract) men were condemned to die , now also keep in mind that Babies die , so it is not for their own individual independant sin that they die ......... but for ADAMS!

Hope this helped sister ........

Rom.5

[1]
Therefore, since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.


[2] Through him we have obtained access to this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in our hope of sharing the glory of God.
[3] More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance,
[4] and endurance produces character, and character produces hope,
[5] and hope does not disappoint us, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us.
[6]
While we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.


[7] Why, one will hardly die for a righteous man -- though perhaps for a good man one will dare even to die.
[8] But God shows his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.
[9] Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.
[10] For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.
[11] Not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received our reconciliation.
[12]
Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned --


[13] sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
[14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sins were not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.
[15]
But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.


[16] And the free gift is not like the effect of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brings justification.
[17] 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.
[18]
Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men.


[19] For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man's obedience many will be made righteous.
[20] Law came in, to increase the trespass; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more,
[21] so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

 

[Imblessed]

thank you cygnus. I will study this a little further. I found Reformationist and Vigil's debate on original sin in the formal debate room, and it is fascninating, they have really only just gotten started, but as they delve deeper into this area, I believe I will learn quite a bit more.

 

[JM]

That man has so utterly fallen and sinful that he needs God to save him. He can not, because of his nature accept the good offer of God, yet he is free to choose different degrees of sinful actions. John Owen said something like, "...when the waters of sin are still, they are the deepest..."

 

[cygnusx1]

thank you cygnus. I will study this a little further. I found Reformationist and Vigil's debate on original sin in the formal debate room, and it is fascninating, they have really only just gotten started, but as they delve deeper into this area, I believe I will learn quite a bit more.

great , Reformationist is a lovelly Christian and a bright star too ........ one of the best!

 

[CoffeeSwirls]

Adam was created perfect in every way. He was as untainted as a glass of pure water, and purity is demanded by God, nothing less. Sin was introduced to this purity and the purity took it in. I'll use poison to mean the same thing as sin. If you take a water pitcher that will be poured into a glasses and introduce poison to the water, all of the glasses will be tainted and unacceptable.

Another way to look at this is to picture one of those champaign trees with multiple layers of glasses all receiving their fill from the topmost fountain. Regardless of whether you drink alcohol, would you drink of it if the source was tainted even a bit?

Original sin is like a disease that can only be cured through Christ. The applications take a lifetime and the total cleansing of the person does not occur until glorification. We sin because we are sinners through Adam. We are not sinners merely because we sin. The cart does not go before the horse.

You didn't eat the fruit and neither did I. But the poison is in each of us regardless and has been passed down with each generation. Just as the founding fathers who wrote the Declaration of Independence spoke for you and for me to England, Adam spoke for you and for me to God. We are all in sin from the first moment of conception.

Psalm 58:3
Even from birth the wicked go astray; from the womb they are wayward and speak lies.

 

[Reformationist]

great , Reformationist is a lovelly Christian and a bright star too ........ one of the best!

I am truly humbled by such praise my brother. I often feel as if I'm stumbling around in the dark so if anything I say ever comes across as coherent it is solely by the grace of God.

God bless

 

[cygnusx1]

I am truly humbled by such praise my brother. I often feel as if I'm stumbling around in the dark so if anything I say ever comes across as coherent it is solely by the grace of God.

God bless

ahhhhhhhhh spoken by one who knows Grace by experience as distinct from just within a book ........ God Bless you My Brother !

 

[Jon_]

R.C. Sproul addresses this very well in Chosen by God. I don't remember exactly how he puts it, so I'll have to use my own words.

Simply put, we are all personally responsible for our own sins; however, the responsibility for the sinful nature of mankind rests in Adam. The Old Testament clearly states that God does not hold men accountable for the sins of their fathers, yet we are all born into sin. Is this a contradiction? No, it's a paradox.

Adam and Adam alone is responsible for partaking of the fruit. That is his own sin. The fallen nature that we are born into is the consequence of that sin. Adam is responsible for the sinful nature of mankind--we must suffer the consequences of it. And the consequence is that we will sin and die.

 

[Reformationist]

R.C. Sproul addresses this very well in Chosen by God. I don't remember exactly how he puts it, so I'll have to use my own words.

Simply put, we are all personally responsible for our own sins; however, the responsibility for the sinful nature of mankind rests in Adam. The Old Testament clearly states that God does not hold men accountable for the sins of their fathers, yet we are all born into sin. Is this a contradiction? No, it's a paradox.

Adam and Adam alone is responsible for partaking of the fruit. That is his own sin. The fallen nature that we are born into is the consequence of that sin. Adam is responsible for the sinful nature of mankind--we must suffer the consequences of it. And the consequence is that we will sin and die.

Ummm...I've read Chosen by God numerous times and I don't think Sproul ever makes such a claim. We are not merely partakers of the wrath of God against the consequence of sin. We, by our union with Adam, stand guilty before God. You see, the clear example we are given to contrast our union with Adam is our union with Christ. We do not simply enjoy the consequence of Christ's obedience. God considers us personally righteous on account of our union with Him. Righteousness relates to our standing before the judgment seat of God as it relates to the Law. In our union with Christ we are justified by His perfect obedience and, in fact, His righteousness is imputed to us and we are counted as righteous. So, just as we are innocent of transgression through our union with Christ, we were guilty of transgression through our union with Adam. Scripture itself proclaims this very thing:

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned

God bless

 

[Imblessed]

Hmmm, this is quite the issue isn't it? From what I'm gathering through my studies, it's the differing views of the Original Sin that has brought about the different views of Pelegianism, arminianism, Calvinism etc.

That's why I'm trying to figure out this issue. I know the doctrine of Total Depravity is the truth, yet I'm still trying to reconscile it with Original Sin and how accountable we are for that. I guess accountable is the right word. It's not JUST the consequences we are dealing with...is that what you are saying reformationist? It's a hard subject, and one I don't think I'm going to get right away.

I appreciate everyone speaking up on it....

 

[Jon_]

Ummm...I've read Chosen by God numerous times and I don't think Sproul ever makes such a claim. We are not merely partakers of the wrath of God against the consequence of sin. We, by our union with Adam, stand guilty before God. You see, the clear example we are given to contrast our union with Adam is our union with Christ. We do not simply enjoy the consequence of Christ's obedience. God considers us personally righteous on account of our union with Him. Righteousness relates to our standing before the judgment seat of God as it relates to the Law. In our union with Christ we are justified by His perfect obedience and, in fact, His righteousness is imputed to us and we are counted as righteous. So, just as we are innocent of transgression through our union with Christ, we were guilty of transgression through our union with Adam. Scripture itself proclaims this very thing:

Romans 5:12
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned

God bless

Hmm, perhaps you're right. I might have assumed R.C. made implication where he did not. Of course, he's not the type of author to convey a message through implication. He comes right out and says it. In that case, I recind that what I said is R.C.'s position on the issue. I must have been mistaken.

I really need to go back and read that chapter again because I'm a little unclear on the wholeness of your argument. Thanks for the correction, though.

 

[Reformationist]

It's not JUST the consequences we are dealing with...is that what you are saying reformationist?

Absolutely. I am not contending that we personally reached out and took of the apple in the literal sense. I am aware of the position that we all existed in Adam in seminal form so, by virtue of that, we are equally accountable. I do not believe that such a claim is supported biblically, nor do I believe it is necessary to defend the imputation of both guilt and consequence that man experiences in the Fall. I merely acknowledge that God, being wholly righteous, appointed for mankind a representative through which we would either procure great blessing or great defilement. It is a mark of great and ungodly pride to claim that such an appointment was unrighteous because of a mistaken belief that we would have acted differently and, in fact, shows quite clearly that we wouldn't have acted differently. The truth that we must accept is that none of us would have acted differently. Had there been a single created person that would have acted differently then it begs the questions, "Why is it righteous of God to impute to them the guilt of a transgression they, themselves, would not have committed," and secondly, "Why did God not know they would have persevered in obedience where Adam and Eve did not?"

It's a hard subject, and one I don't think I'm going to get right away.

It is a hard subject but it is at the foundation of our faith in God. Think about it, if we are not guilty in Adam then the righteousness of Christ's vicarious obedience can also not be accounted to us. Who wants to face the judgment of God on the basis of their own works?

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

Hmm, perhaps you're right. I might have assumed R.C. made implication where he did not. Of course, he's not the type of author to convey a message through implication. He comes right out and says it.

LOL! You're definitely right about that.

I really need to go back and read that chapter again because I'm a little unclear on the wholeness of your argument. Thanks for the correction, though.

Thank you for your godly response. If you glean any further insight from rereading that portion please share it with the rest of us.

God bless

 

[Jon_]

LOL! You're definitely right about that.



Thank you for your godly response. If you glean any further insight from rereading that portion please share it with the rest of us.

God bless

I just got home and read the chapter again. You were correct. The federal view of the Fall is the view that R.C. advocates, and the federal view makes Adam the representative of mankind in the Fall.

I have to be completely honest when I say that I still have a doubt concerning it. That doubt encompasses Adam's representation of mankind in the Fall. That Adam was elected by God to be the representative of man is not something that I contend. All that was and is works for the glory of God in accordance with his will. Of course I don't deny that at all. I'm just stuck a bit between whether by Adam's failure to uphold righteousness we fell into bondage because he was deemed representive of mankind, or if we are born in bondage as a consequence of his transgression.

Man, it almost sounds like a purely semantical distinction, but I think there is something to it. I feel like there is something for me to learn here, but I'm not sure what it is. I hope that my fellow Reformers could lend their insight into this subject, so that I might see if I have missed something.

Essentially, my position is this: Mankind is born into a state of total depravity as a result of Adam's fall. Adam himself is responsible for the sin, but the result is that mankind is now born with a sinful nature.

When I was a Nazarene, I learned about the "Age of Accountability." I now now that to be a system of denial used to comfort otherwise burdened souls. Psalms 58:3-5 dispelled the myth for me (NKJV):

3The wicked are estranged from the womb;
They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.
4Their poison is like the poison of a serpent;
They are like the deaf cobra that stops its ear,
5Which will not heed the voice of charmers,
Charming ever so skillfully.

The Psalmist makes it clear that by virtue of our birth we are sinners. I understand this completely.

I'm hoping someone could better address Ezekiel 18:19, 20. I don't think R.C. has done very well to provide a counter-argument to the Realist view of the Fall. Now, I'm not a Realist, don't misjudge that statement. I see that I'm somewhere between Realism (in that I don't fully accept all of the federal view) and federalism (in that I believe that Adam was a represent of mankind and that his sin caused mankind to become fallen--we weren't "there" in Eden when it happned). My only contention is that Adam's sin is a consequence that caused the fall of men. We are fallen because Adam sinned, but his sin is not our sin. We each have our own sin, but we are not responsible by association, by representation, by whatever, for Adam's sin.

Am I splitting hairs, here?

 

[cygnusx1]

My only suggestion is to do what The Apostle Paul did , take a good look at exactly what , who , when , and why , took place on the cross , we know that Christ and the Church have a mystical union (hence the teaching on marriage) we know that we came from the body of Christ like Eve from Adam (bone of his bone flesh of his flesh) and we know we died and three days later were raised with Christ and now , we in spirit are seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus , our lives are hid in Chrst in God .......... yes I take all of those things literally ..... now compare that unity with the unity we had in Adam .......you are not aware of sinning in Adam in Eden , but then how much awareness do you have of yourself right NOW in heaven ........in Christ!


just some thoughts .........

 

[Beoga]

Ok, was was over in the baptist, anabaptist section. THere was a thread about original sin that caught my interest.

What's the general view of original sin--in basic laymen's terms if you will--according to a reformed believer?

Are we guilty, literally, of adam's original sin? It seemed to me that they believe that Calvinist believe we are literally guilty of his sin's also. I had always thought that we are guilty of our own sins, but his orginal sin caused everyone born to be born bent totally away from God.

You may have to go to the baptist room to read that thread, I'll try to link it in here somehow. It may explain my confusion a bit.

I'm having trouble clarifying.....

i got kicked out because i said something about dave hunt and i forgot that i had a presbyterian symbol and not my normal calvinist or baptist symbol...oh well

 

[Imblessed]

Partially snipped....

I have to be completely honest when I say that I still have a doubt concerning it. That doubt encompasses Adam's representation of mankind in the Fall. That Adam was elected by God to be the representative of man is not something that I contend. All that was and is works for the glory of God in accordance with his will. Of course I don't deny that at all. I'm just stuck a bit between whether by Adam's failure to uphold righteousness we fell into bondage because he was deemed representive of mankind, or if we are born in bondage as a consequence of his transgression.

Man, it almost sounds like a purely semantical distinction, but I think there is something to it. I feel like there is something for me to learn here, but I'm not sure what it is. I hope that my fellow Reformers could lend their insight into this subject, so that I might see if I have missed something.

Essentially, my position is this: Mankind is born into a state of total depravity as a result of Adam's fall. Adam himself is responsible for the sin, but the result is that mankind is now born with a sinful nature.



I'm hoping someone could better address Ezekiel 18:19, 20. I don't think R.C. has done very well to provide a counter-argument to the Realist view of the Fall. Now, I'm not a Realist, don't misjudge that statement. I see that I'm somewhere between Realism (in that I don't fully accept all of the federal view) and federalism (in that I believe that Adam was a represent of mankind and that his sin caused mankind to become fallen--we weren't "there" in Eden when it happned). My only contention is that Adam's sin is a consequence that caused the fall of men. We are fallen because Adam sinned, but his sin is not our sin. We each have our own sin, but we are not responsible by association, by representation, by whatever, for Adam's sin.

Am I splitting hairs, here?

OK Jon,

you totally nailed it for me. You put that sooo much better than I could have!

that was what I was trying to say in the first place....well, at least that is my point of view, i just couldn't express it...

at any rate, I'm reallly looking forward to some more conversation on this...

 

[Imblessed]

My only suggestion is to do what The Apostle Paul did , take a good look at exactly what , who , when , and why , took place on the cross , we know that Christ and the Church have a mystical union (hence the teaching on marriage) we know that we came from the body of Christ like Eve from Adam (bone of his bone flesh of his flesh) and we know we died and three days later were raised with Christ and now , we in spirit are seated in heavenly places in Christ Jesus , our lives are hid in Chrst in God .......... yes I take all of those things literally ..... now compare that unity with the unity we had in Adam .......you are not aware of sinning in Adam in Eden , but then how much awareness do you have of yourself right NOW in heaven ........in Christ!


just some thoughts .........

I feel really dumb here..... I have to be totally honest(or else people aren't going to know where I stand on this-at least how ignorant I feel on this) and say that you've TOTALLY lost me.

could you possibly elaberate just a bit here....i feel sooo silly asking......