Romans 5 and original sin?

[Assyrian]

Well, I agree that it is a moot point whether we are imputed Adam's individual sin or not, because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, including babies in the womb.

You are assuming Paul was including little children and babies when he said 'all have sinned'. I doubt his readers would have understood it that way, most were Jewish Christians or Gentile God-fearers who would have been taught in synagogues that children were only culpable after they reached the age of responsibility. It is what we see in Isaiah 7:16 For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good, it is what Paul was talking about in Romans 7. No, when Paul said all have sinned, he was writing as an adult speaking to other adults.

We inherited Adam's sinful nature, and this proclivity to sin puts us under condemnation.

The bible doesn't actually say that anywhere.

Yes, but you are misunderstanding something very clear: that those who sinned apart from the law died anyway, as made clear in Romans 5. Sin under the law or apart from the law, we still fall short. What Paul is speaking of is the fact that the Law actually increased his sinfulness, because he was aware of what he was doing but found himself incapable of not sinning.

Paul talks about that in that passage Rom 2:12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law. 13 For it is not those who hear the law who are righteous in God’s sight, but it is those who obey the law who will be declared righteous. 14 (Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.) He is referring to Gentiles who have never heard the law of Moses but still know the difference between right and wrong written in the consciences. This is still talking about people old enough to understand, whose consciences can tell them whether what they have done is right or wrong. Paul is not talking about babies.

 

[abacabb3]

You are assuming Paul was including little children and babies when he said 'all have sinned'.

And you are assuming they didn't. You have several things working against you.

1. James 2:10 Says those who sin once are guilty of breaking the whole law
2. Secular science shows that infants lie before they talk
3. Christ declaring He is the only way to the Father (children don't have this saving faith)
4. Bible speaking universally that all men are not righteous (Romans 3:15) and that "sin spread to all men" (Romans 5:12)


So, science and Scripture all indicate the position that all humans are in sin and those who have a soft spot for babies have no Scripture to back them up...as in none, zilch, nada. Yet the preponderance of Scripture (Psalms 51, Ephesians 1, Romans 3, Romans 5, etc. etc.) says the opposite and it takes mental gymnastics (and an misinterpretation of Matt 19:14) to say the opposite. Sorry, but such a position is intellectually wanting.

It is what we see in Isaiah 7:16 For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good.

That's prophecy about Christ, so of course He refuses evil and chooses the good, unlike any other human.

The bible doesn't actually say that anywhere.

I believe that would be the correct interpretation of ROmans 5:17
"For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ."

Death comes through Adam. Whether we literally inherit his specific sin, or we inherit his sinfulness, it is through him we die, and we die because of sin.

But of course, those who don't understand that God saves people, instead of people smart enough to have faith thereby saving themselves, they think that babies therefore are not liable for their sin, or they are somehow sinless.

However, the Scripture doesn't say this. The only way to the Father is through Christ. The only way to place faith in Christ is if God opens your eyes...so faith is an act of grace. So, if tons of adults die without saving grace, so do a ton of babies. It's pretty straight forward.

Paul talks about that in that passage Rom 2:12All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law, and all who sin under the law will be judged by the law.--He is referring to Gentiles who have never heard the law of Moses but still know the difference between right and wrong written in the consciences.

And, even by their standards they fall short, because no one always abides by the law that they are onto themselves.

"Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." (Romans 3:19)

Be careful not to read something that's not there. The quotation doesn't say "well, only those under the law are condemned." It says, unequivocally, "all the world may become guilty before God" as in those with no law and those with it.

The matter is settled and any other rendering rejects the Gospel and the necessity of having faith in Christ.

 

[holyrokker]

Secular science shows that infants lie before they talk

Really? I'm going to need to see some peer-reviewed articles that provide evidence for that statement. That sounds very far-fetched to me.

lie: intransitive verb
1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive

2: to create a false or misleading impression

 

[holyrokker]

"sin spread to all men" (Romans 5:12)

The passage actually says that death spread to all because all have sinned.

 

[abacabb3]

The passage actually says that death spread to all because all have sinned.

Perhaps one of the few situations when saying "same difference" makes sense.

Through one man sin entered the world

and death through sin

and thus death spread to all men

because all have sinned


Beautiful poetic parallelism, one man sins, sin now exists, causing death, and all men died because implicitly, now they have sin!

 

[abacabb3]

Really? I'm going to need to see some peer-reviewed articles that provide evidence for that statement. That sounds very far-fetched to me.

lie: intransitive verb
1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive

2: to create a false or misleading impression

Behavioral experts find infants begin to lie as early as six months. Obviously no one taught the baby this, they were born with the ability. Safe to say, born with sin.

Think about it, did anyone actually teach you to covet? Teach you to desire idols other than God? You are obviously born with these proclivities.

Safe to say in Psalm 51, even in the womb we are in sin, but until a semi-advanced aged (six months or so according to science) we are jsut incapable of physically and observably manifesting the sin. But the sin was always there. it's in your DNA. A 2 day old drinking breast milk does not love his mother as himself. That's a fact. And even at that age we violate God's msot important commandment.

We are very much sinners from the time of birth, arguably, the time of conception.

 

[holyrokker]

Behavioral experts find infants begin to lie as early as six months.

OK - I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this article, though it isn't a scientific study; nor does it cite any scientific studies.

Obviously no one taught the baby this, they were born with the ability. Safe to say, born with sin.

Safer to say they learned the behavior (as the article mentions). Learned behavior and innate moral character are two different things. There is no evidence in Scripture to indicate that we are born sinful. There are several passages stating that people sin at an early age; but nothing to indicate that we are born sinful. It is an inference that you are making.

Safe to say in Psalm 51, even in the womb we are in sin

That's another inference that you are making: and not a safe one at that.

But the sin was always there. it's in your DNA.

In the DNA???? Really? Is sin genetic? Can you point to any biological study that would lead to such a conclusion?

 

[holyrokker]

Beautiful poetic parallelism, one man sins, sin now exists, causing death, and all men died because implicitly, now they have sin!

The key phrase is "beautiful poetic parallelism." It's not a doctrinal statement intended to imply a sinful nature that is somehow passed down from Adam to every human.

 

[Assyrian]

And you are assuming they didn't.

Ummm no.The assumption was yours, your argument was based on it. I discussed the context the statement was given in and what it would have meant to the people he was speaking to.

You have several things working against you.

1. James 2:10 Says those who sin once are guilty of breaking the whole law

Don't see the relevance of that James was speaking of the Mosaic law which wasn't binding on Gentiles of Jewish children. Bar Mitzvah literally means 'son of the law'.

2. Secular science shows that infants lie before they talk

Do they know it's wrong?

3. Christ declaring He is the only way to the Father (children don't have this saving faith)

THe same Jesus who also said as you mention Matt 19:14 "Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven." But the question isn't whether Jesus leads little children to the father but whether these little innocents have committed any sins they are guilty of.

4. Bible speaking universally that all men are not righteous (Romans 3:15) and that "sin spread to all men" (Romans 5:12)

Again, Paul an adult speaking to adults, adults who didn't think little children were guilty of sin.

So, science and Scripture all indicate the position that all humans are in sin and those who have a soft spot for babies have no Scripture to back them up...as in none, zilch, nada. Yet the preponderance of Scripture (Psalms 51, Ephesians 1, Romans 3, Romans 5, etc. etc.) says the opposite and it takes mental gymnastics (and an misinterpretation of Matt 19:14) to say the opposite. Sorry, but such a position is intellectually wanting.

There are plenty of scriptures which say people die for their own sins not their father's, that talk about the age of accountability when children learn the difference between right and wrong, and you have Paul's own statement in Romans 7 where he talked about being alive before he understood the commandment then dying when he broke the commandment and sinned. Rom 7:7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." 8 But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died.
Paul also fits Romans 5:12 and so death spread to all men because all sinned. But you have to look at how it worked itself out in Paul's life. Death spread to Paul because Paul sinned. but it didn't spread to him, couldn't spread to him, until he understood right and wrong, and did what he knew was wrong.

That's prophecy about Christ, so of course He refuses evil and chooses the good, unlike any other human.

Oh, we can know it too, and sometime even practice it, even Gentiles Rom 2:14. But Christ is the only one who never failed who always refused evil and always chose good. But interestingly, even Christ didn't know the difference between right and wrong when he was a baby. Isaiah 7:15 He shall eat curds and honey when he knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good.
16 For before the boy knows how to refuse the evil and choose the good.

You also see the age of accountability in Deut 1:39 And as for your little ones, who you said would become a prey, and your children, who today have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in there. And to them I will give it, and they shall possess it.

I believe that would be the correct interpretation of ROmans 5:17
"For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ."

Death comes through Adam. Whether we literally inherit his specific sin, or we inherit his sinfulness, it is through him we die, and we die because of sin.

Paul already explain how death reigned in Romans 5:12 and so death spread to all men because all sinned. Saying we inherited Adam's sin nature is a huge claim to make, it take much more than just using the idea to explain another verse. We need a clear statement of this concept, and it isn't found anywhere in scripture.

But of course, those who don't understand that God saves people, instead of people smart enough to have faith thereby saving themselves, they think that babies therefore are not liable for their sin, or they are somehow sinless.

However, the Scripture doesn't say this. The only way to the Father is through Christ. The only way to place faith in Christ is if God opens your eyes...so faith is an act of grace. So, if tons of adults die without saving grace, so do a ton of babies. It's pretty straight forward.

Irresistible grace is a different discussion But I don't think tons of adults dying lost in their own sins means tons of innocent babies are lost too.

And, even by their standards they fall short, because no one always abides by the law that they are onto themselves.

"Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God." (Romans 3:19)

Be careful not to read something that's not there. The quotation doesn't say "well, only those under the law are condemned." It says, unequivocally, "all the world may become guilty before God" as in those with no law and those with it.

The matter is settled and any other rendering rejects the Gospel and the necessity of having faith in Christ.

Paul is talking about Jews and Gentiles in that chapter. By the whole world Paul means both Jews and Gentiles are accountable to God. But he is still talking to adults about adults like themselves around the world. If Paul wanted to overturn the bible based Jewish teaching of age of accountability, he would have addressed it directly, he would have had to for his readers to understand he meant babies as well as grown ups. It makes sense to you when you already believe children are born stained with Original Sin to read Paul's 'all the world' as meaning babies as well as grown ups. But for Paul's readers who understood and assumed little children were innocent, they would never have read the passage that way. It would have seemed ludicrous. Writing to people like that, if Paul meant children too he would have had to explain it very clearly.

 

[Assyrian]

Behavioral experts find infants begin to lie as early as six months. Obviously no one taught the baby this, they were born with the ability. Safe to say, born with sin.

Check the third last paragraph:

"It demonstrates they're clearly able to distinguish that what they are doing will have an effect. This is essentially all adults do when they tell lies, except in adults it becomes more morally loaded."
​

It remind me of Koko the gorilla who has a sign language vocabulary of 1000 words, and a pet kitten.

Are all primates liars?
Like most people, Koko has good behaviors and bad behaviors. Like most people, she takes credit for the good behaviors and blames the bad ones on someone else.
The cat came in handy on one particularly destructive day. When no one was around, Koko managed to rip a sink out of the wall in her habitat. When the humans returned, they asked Koko who ripped out the sink.
Koko signed, "The cat did it."
The framed cat was not available for comment, but we assume he was shocked at this betrayal.
​

Does this mean Koko the gorilla was born with Original Sin?

​

 

[hedrick]

Does this mean Koko the gorilla was born with Original Sin?

Yes.

 

[Assyrian]

Does this mean Koko the gorilla was born with Original Sin?

Yes.

So Jesus really meant it when he said preach the gospel to every creature Mark 16:15.

 

[hedrick]

There are humans (typically young children, but there are other situations as well) who understand at some level right and wrong, but are probably not capable of understanding the atonement. Most Christians believe that such humans can be saved, and many Christians believe that they are all saved.

I would say that if Koko is capable of understanding repentance, that she should be encouraged to repent. That's probably the most we can hope for. Beyond that I leave it to God.

 

[abacabb3]

Check the third last paragraph:

"It demonstrates they're clearly able to distinguish that what they are doing will have an effect. This is essentially all adults do when they tell lies, except in adults it becomes more morally loaded."
​

"Morally loaded?" A lie is a lie, that's sin. Not loving God with your whole ehart and mind, which an infant does not is sin.

Outside God's grace, no one can be saved, case closed. That includes KoKo the monkey, but being that KoKo is not made in the image of God but every single human being is, the standards are different.​

 

[holyrokker]

These are two contradictory statements:

Every single human is made in the image of God.
Every single human is born sinful.

 

[abacabb3]

Don't see the relevance of that James was speaking of the Mosaic law which wasn't binding on Gentiles of Jewish children.

Romans 2 says that the conscience of those without the law is a law onto themselves. Being that no one abides by the entirety of their conscience, they are also without excuse.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

Do they know it's wrong?

Doesn't matter.

I forget the psalm, but it mentions confessing sin that we are not even awaring we are committing. The Levitcal law also makes mention of such sins (Lev 5:17-18)

But the question isn't whether Jesus leads little children to the father but whether these little innocents have committed any sins they are guilty of.

Where in the Bible says they didn't? I have scripture that says and shows that they did. Still waiting for the opposite other than rhetorical arguments about it not being fair, kids don't know better. News flash: people born in repressive muslim and buddhist societies don't know better either. But, they are still without excuse.

Again, Paul an adult speaking to adults, adults who didn't think little children were guilty of sin.

You want to think that, but the clear context is sin spread to ALL and ALL died. Being that there are no eternal babies walking about the Earth, it is abundantly clear that there is a NECESSARY connection between sin and death. So, death spread to all as did sin, that includes all ages.

There are plenty of scriptures which say people die for their own sins not their father's, that talk about the age of accountability

Absolutely no Scripture talks about an "Age of accountability," that's something someone made up and it has no bearing on Scripture at all, as it is outside of Scripture entirely.

Find one Scripture reference to an "age of accountability." Fail to do this and you reveal that your whole position has no Scriptural merit whatsoever. And no, Deut 1:39 does not lend us this idea, it is saying that the children were not responsible for the sin that the Israelites had to spend 40 years in the wilderness for. And again, someone could have no "knowledge of good and evil" and still sin, as Adam and Eve did before the at of the tree of knowledge and sinned by disobeyong God.

I don't even need to address anything else. I believe everything hinges on this one issue. If the Scripture mentions nothing about an age of accountability, then all are accountable. As simple as that.

 

[abacabb3]

These are two contradictory statements:

Every single human is made in the image of God.
Every single human is born sinful.

How is this a contradiction? Adam was explicitly made in God's image. Adam also sinned. What are you trying to imply?

 

[Assyrian]

"Morally loaded?" A lie is a lie, that's sin. Not loving God with your whole ehart and mind, which an infant does not is sin.

Outside God's grace, no one can be saved, case closed. That includes KoKo the monkey, but being that KoKo is not made in the image of God but every single human being is, the standards are different.

If you say 'a lie is a lie, that's sin', then you can't contradict yourself saying there are different standards. It is not the image of God either because angels aren't made in God's image and God holds them accountable. But what angels and adult human beings have in common is a moral awareness of right and wrong, which Koko and little children do not.

Romans 2 says that the conscience of those without the law is a law onto themselves. Being that no one abides by the entirety of their conscience, they are also without excuse.

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.

That has nothing to do with what James said about breaking the whole law.

Doesn't matter.

Yes it does. Unless you want to put animals on trial for adultery, fornication, theft and even murder.

I forget the psalm, but it mentions confessing sin that we are not even awaring we are committing. The Levitcal law also makes mention of such sins (Lev 5:17-18)

Lev 5:17 "If anyone sins, doing any of the things that by the LORD's commandments ought not to be done, though he did not know it, then realizes his guilt, he shall bear his iniquity. 18 He shall bring to the priest a ram without blemish out of the flock, or its equivalent for a guilt offering, and the priest shall make atonement for him for the mistake that he made unintentionally, and he shall be forgiven. So this is saying babies should being a ram to the priest to make a sacrifice? This is talking about adults who have entered into a covenant with God who know they are supposed to follow all of its stipulations, breaking the terms of the contract. Entering into the covenant brings with the responsibility to understand and follow the terms.

Where in the Bible says they didn't? I have scripture that says and shows that they did. Still waiting for the opposite other than rhetorical arguments about it not being fair, kids don't know better. News flash: people born in repressive muslim and buddhist societies don't know better either. But, they are still without excuse.

Because as Paul say their consciences tell them if what they are doing is right or wrong. Rom 2:14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them. You need to present those scriptures because the bible never says babies are guilty of sin, because Paul said he only died when understood what he was doing, he understood the command disobeyed and died. Why didn't he die before with all the supposed sin he committed as a baby?

You want to think that, but the clear context is sin spread to ALL and ALL died. Being that there are no eternal babies walking about the Earth, it is abundantly clear that there is a NECESSARY connection between sin and death. So, death spread to all as did sin, that includes all ages.

You are assuming Paul is talking about physical rather than spiritual death. What type of death did Paul die when he broke the command 'do not covet'? If he died physically as a teenager how was his corpse able to guard the coats of the people stoning Stephen? How was his cadaver able to travel to Damascus to persecute the Christians there? You have a problem if you try to insist all has to mean everybody because that would mean everybody is saved too 1Co 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.

Absolutely no Scripture talks about an "Age of accountability," that's something someone made up and it has no bearing on Scripture at all, as it is outside of Scripture entirely.
Find one Scripture reference to an "age of accountability." Fail to do this and you reveal that your whole position has no Scriptural merit whatsoever. And no, Deut 1:39 does not lend us this idea, it is saying that the children were not responsible for the sin that the Israelites had to spend 40 years in the wilderness for. And again, someone could have no "knowledge of good and evil" and still sin, as Adam and Eve did before the at of the tree of knowledge and sinned by disobeyong God.

Adam and Eve knew they shouldn't eat the fruit. They didn't have the knowledge and guilt that comes with the personal experience of sinning, but they knew what they should and shouldn't do. The children in Deuteronomy had no knowledge of good or evil Deut 1:39.

I don't even need to address anything else. I believe everything hinges on this one issue. If the Scripture mentions nothing about an age of accountability, then all are accountable. As simple as that.

The bible distinguishes between children who don't understand right and wrong and adults who do. It didn't need to say that because they don't understand right and wrong they are not morally accountable. Because who in their right mind back then would have thought babies guilty of things they did without any idea of right or wrong. It was only when the doctrine of Original Sin was dreamt up in the fifth century that people came up with the ides of babies being sinful. But the bible doesn't address the issues we came up with after it was written. To the ancient Hebrews it was obvious that children are innocent, and when the bible talked of children before they know the difference between right and wrong that is how they would have understood it. It is how the Jews did understand it. And as I have said before, since this is what everybody believed, Paul would have had to make it very clear babies really are evil and sinful when he wrote Romans. He didn't.

 

[holyrokker]

These are two contradictory statements:

Every single human is made in the image of God.
Every single human is born sinful.

How is this a contradiction? Adam was explicitly made in God's image. Adam also sinned. What are you trying to imply?

Did God create Adam with a sinful nature?

Are we all made in God's image?

 

[holyrokker]

Absolutely no Scripture talks about an "Age of accountability," that's something someone made up and it has no bearing on Scripture at all, as it is outside of Scripture entirely.

Find one Scripture reference to an "age of accountability." Fail to do this and you reveal that your whole position has no Scriptural merit whatsoever.

I don't even need to address anything else. I believe everything hinges on this one issue. If the Scripture mentions nothing about an age of accountability, then all are accountable. As simple as that.

I agree that there is no such thing in the Bible as "age of accountability".

Likewise, there is no such thing in the Bible as an inherited sin nature.

Let's replace "age of accountability" with "inherited sin nature" and see what your statement becomes:

Absolutely no Scripture talks about an "inherited sin nature," that's something someone made up and it has no bearing on Scripture at all, as it is outside of Scripture entirely.

Find one Scripture reference to an "inherited sin nature" Fail to do this and you reveal that your whole position has no Scriptural merit whatsoever.

I don't even need to address anything else. I believe everything hinges on this one issue. If the Scripture mentions nothing about an inherited sin nature, then all are accountable. As simple as that

Hmm. This is also true.