The concept of Original Sin in the East and West

[seanHayden]

Then you are not accepting God's Word which says we all sin due to the sin of one man. To deny God's Word in your heart will have consequences.

Adam was rich in himself. If you consider him poor, then how can you be delivered from his rich self life that you have now too?

Oh come on now, I said poor Adam in jest! Everyone dumps on Adam all the sin of the world.

I wouldn't sin if Adam hadn't sinned....buwahaha

I sin as Adam sinned, not because he sinned, because I am a sinner.

 

[Reminiscent]

Oh come on now, I said poor Adam in jest! Everyone dumps on Adam all the sin of the world.

All the sin of the world emanates from Adam. We don't dump on him, but just state a fact.

I wouldn't sin if Adam hadn't sinned....buwahaha

Christians don't say you wouldn't sin if Adam hadn't sinned, for Adam had not eaten of the tree of life.

I sin as Adam sinned, not because he sinned, because I am a sinner.

You sin as Adam sinned, because he sinned, for all that is born of the flesh is flesh and all flesh sins.

So you are a sinner. You are not a sinner because of you, but because you are born of the flesh.

 

[seanHayden]

All the sin of the world emanates from Adam. We don't dump on him, but just state a fact.


Christians don't say you wouldn't sin if Adam hadn't sinned, for Adam had not eaten of the tree of life.


You sin as Adam sinned, because he sinned, for all that is born of the flesh is flesh and all flesh sins.

So you are a sinner. You are not a sinner because of you, but because you are born of the flesh.

I am not a sinner because of me?

Now, try to work that into a prayer of repentence.

I am exactly a sinner because of me.

 

[Reminiscent]

I am not a sinner because of me?

"You are not a sinner because of you, but because you are born of the flesh". You weren't a sinner because of something you did. You are a sinner because you were born that way, so it is not of you that caused you to be this way.

Now, try to work that into a prayer of repentence.

Thank you Lord Jesus that you don't blame me for being a sinner, but provide me a salvation from sin: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved" (John 3.17).

I am exactly a sinner because of me.

You did not cause you to be born into sin. You are not Adam.

 

[seanHayden]

"You are not a sinner because of you, but because you are born of the flesh". You weren't a sinner because of something you did. You are a sinner because you were born that way, so it is not of you that caused you to be this way.

Thank you Lord Jesus that you don't blame me for being a sinner, but provide me a salvation from sin: "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved" (John 3.17).


You did not cause you to be born into sin. You are not Adam.

You don't blame me for being a sinner?

Hardly a prayer of repentence.

I have sinned not because I couldn't overcome my flesh, but because I have loved sin more then you God.

I am a sinner because I sought from my youth to sin, I learned how to sin, I worked hard to sin and didn't seek God but instead to fulfill every whim of my wicked heart.

I loved sin, that is why I sinned. I corrupted my flesh and trained it to love sin. I was like a dog who slobbered at the ringing of a bell and turned to his own vomit.

Now we are getting at the heart of sin.

 

[ROGER459]

(James 2:10) For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

This thread started out with TWO Points of View, BOTH OF WHICH ARE WRONG!

The WORD OF GOD, says that IF YOU CANNOT KEEP THE WHOLE LAW, you are Guilty OF VIOLATION THE WHOLE LAW.....!

LET THE WORD = Define SIN, and Not Some Religion!

Thanks, Roger459

 

[Maccie]

Oh, for goodness sake, Roger, go and shout somewhere else! Take your soapbox and placards and go and stand on a street corner somewhere.

 

[ROGER459]

(Ezekiel 2:7) And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.

(2Timothy 4:1-to-4) I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
(2Ti 4:2) Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
(2Ti 4:3)For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
(2Ti 4:4) And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Thanks, Roger459

http://home.att.net/~roger459

 

[Reminiscent]

You don't blame me for being a sinner?

Hardly a prayer of repentence.

Thankyou Lord for not blaming this soul for being born into sin since he is not the cause of being born into sin (Adam was the cause of this), but he is responsible for his sin to receive the cross and be under the precious blood. And that you give us the strength in our spirit to refuse such a false accusation from the evil spirit is by your grace alone! Amen.

I have sinned not because I couldn't overcome my flesh, but because I have loved sin more then you God.

It is because you can not overcome your flesh you were born into that you love sin.

I am a sinner because I sought from my youth to sin, I learned how to sin, I worked hard to sin and didn't seek God but instead to fulfill every whim of my wicked heart.

The reason for this is because you were first born into sin, but praise God there is a salvation.

I loved sin, that is why I sinned. I corrupted my flesh and trained it to love sin. I was like a dog who slobbered at the ringing of a bell and turned to his own vomit.

You love sin because you were born into sin. If you were not born into sin you may have never loved sin. If Adam had eaten of the tree of life and not the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you would never have sinned, nor have been born into sin.

Your flesh was corrupted not because of you, but because you were born into sin. You were a sinner at birth. All that is born of the flesh is flesh: flesh is sin of the body and self of the soul. May you be saved from that slobberingness.

Now we are getting at the heart of sin.

The heart of sin remains from Satan the tempter to Adam's fall, and thus, all men are born into sin. You are not the cause of your own sin, you were born that way.

Let us praise the Lord for this discernment!

 

[Reminiscent]

(James 2:10) For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

This thread started out with TWO Points of View, BOTH OF WHICH ARE WRONG!

The WORD OF GOD, says that IF YOU CANNOT KEEP THE WHOLE LAW, you are Guilty OF VIOLATION THE WHOLE LAW.....!

LET THE WORD = Define SIN, and Not Some Religion!

Thanks, Roger459

This thread started out with one correct view, then another was introduced that did not agree with God's Word. The correct view was that God does not blame us for being born into sin, since we are not the cause of being born into sin. This cause was Adam's. The incorrect view is to teach that God blames man for being born into sin even though man did not conceive himself.

We are responsible for remaining in sin since God has given us a perfect salvation to receive deliverance from sin, to have power over sin and self.

Let the Word tell you the truth rather than your self,

All "which is born of the flesh is flesh" (John 3:6).

What is flesh? "That which born of the flesh is flesh".

How does man become flesh? "That which is born of the flesh is flesh".

What is the nature of the flesh? "That which is born of the flesh is flesh".

What is the verdict?

"Man, for that he also is flesh" (Gen. 6:3).

Since you can find no Scripture in the Bible that says God blames man for being born, then who is really accusing in your spirit?

 

[Reminiscent]

(Ezekiel 2:7) And thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear: for they are most rebellious.

(2Timothy 4:1-to-4) I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;
(2Ti 4:2) Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.
(2Ti 4:3)For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;
(2Ti 4:4) And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.

Thanks, Roger459

http://home.att.net/~roger459

What is the fable? The fable is that God blames man for being born. To accuse God of this is a sin, and praise the Lord, God will judge this accusation against Him since it would be unrighteous of God not to do so. If a person will never repent of this sin, all he can do is wait for Great White Throne.

What a righteous and holy God! I am in awe!

 

[seanHayden]

Thankyou Lord for not blaming this soul for being born into sin since he is not the cause of being born into sin (Adam was the cause of this), but he is responsible for his sin to receive the cross and be under the precious blood. And that you give us the strength in our spirit to refuse such a false accusation from the evil spirit is by your grace alone! Amen.


It is because you can not overcome your flesh you were born into that you love sin.


The reason for this is because you were first born into sin, but praise God there is a salvation.


You love sin because you were born into sin. If you were not born into sin you may have never loved sin. If Adam had eaten of the tree of life and not the tree of knowledge of good and evil, you would never have sinned, nor have been born into sin.

Your flesh was corrupted not because of you, but because you were born into sin. You were a sinner at birth. All that is born of the flesh is flesh: flesh is sin of the body and self of the soul. May you be saved from that slobberingness.


The heart of sin remains from Satan the tempter to Adam's fall, and thus, all men are born into sin. You are not the cause of your own sin, you were born that way.

Let us praise the Lord for this discernment!

[FONT=&quot]Don’t you see you’re predicament? [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]If you’re sinful nature is not you’re fault, then why repent?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]More importantly, if you’re sinful nature is not you’re fault, how can you repent?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]God is Justice; can He not separate the inequity of one person from that of another?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]I think that what God told Cain is absolutely true, and wasn’t Cain the son of Adam?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Didn’t God tell Cain, although sin is waiting for you, you can master it?[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]God didn’t tell Cain, you are a sinner because your father sinned and therefore you are destined to sin; no, He told Cain, although sin is an option and you maybe tempted by it, you can master it![/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Also after the flood, God doesn’t say He won’t destroy the world again because people are born to sin. He says that people desire sin even from their youth, meaning that although they could choose not to sin, they are weak and choose to sin.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]The flesh doesn’t make you sin. This is why we repent, because although we can master sin, we are weak or don’t love God, and choose not to master sin. [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]In my understanding, the whole concept of original sin is flawed.[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

[Teke]

The concept of Original Sin in the East and West.

In regards to Original Sin, the concept differs form the Roman Catholic Churches and the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches.

What is the purpose (purpose meaning where did it come from) of guilt in the RC concept of Original Sin? How is that guilt passed on in Original Sin? Is the concept in the RC that a person inherits both sin and guilt of Adam? Are the guilt and sin seen as 2 separate entities or one unit? If there is a separation between the guilt and sin at what point is the separation made? How does this come into effect in regards to story of the putting the blood of the lamb on the door posts?


In the EO Church which Church Father(s) distinguished the difference between the RC and EO view of Original Sin? What was distinguishable between the Churches and at what in history did this difference come into affect? How does this come into effect in regards to story of the putting the blood of the lamb on the door posts?

If I recall, the guilt concept began with St Augustines writings. But that may have been some of the ones he recanted later.

The east doesn't associate guilt with Adams sin. Sin is merely missing the mark, as created beings we do that.

The blood on the doorposts simply represented (token) faith.
As Exodus 12:13 says, "a token" and "when I SEE" it I will pass over you.
To me this is a type in that Christ also came looking for "faith".

"............ Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" Luke 18:8

 

[Tonks]

If I recall, the guilt concept began with St Augustines writings. But that may have been some of the ones he recanted later.

This is true. In the context of the West, however, it really got turbocharged with Aquinas via Anslem.

 

[Teke]

This is true. In the context of the West, however, it really got turbocharged with Aquinas via Anslem.

You'd have to clarify on that. As many times the fathers writings are taken to extremes not meant in their original intent.

St Anslem tried to be metaphysical, but in his attempt to explain the ineffable, he became vertical IMO. IOW making the move from metaphysical to theology.

As I recall he makes five straightforwardly philosophical arguements about metaphysics. He argues for an unmoved mover, an uncaused cause, a necessary being, a maximum being, and an intelligent end, and each of the arguments fits solidly in the tradition of philosophical arguments right up until the last line of each paragraph, where he appends this shift. At the very last line Aquinas turns it, ending each philosophical argument with some variation of the phrase “et hoc dicimus Deum” (and this we call God).

 

[seanHayden]

Sin is merely missing the mark, as created beings we do that.

Might be hard to support that--eh? Although, I bet its a little more fleshed out then that...

 

[Tonks]

You'd have to clarify on that. As many times the fathers writings are taken to extremes not meant in their original intent.

Yeah, that was somewhat unclear....

I believe that your comments about Anselm to be pretty much spot on. I believe, in many cases, that Aquinas took was Anselm said and ran with it.

Perhaps the most difficult element in the traditional Catholic teaching on original sin is the claim that the very guilt of Adam’s sin has been passed on to the entire race. It was Augustine who, in the course of the Pelagian controversy, first drew this conclusion from St. Paul’s discussion of sin, particularly in the letter to the Romans. Augustine ultimately attributed the transmission to the agency of concupiscence, a less than happy solution. When he came to treat the issue in his Summa, Aquinas shifted the agency from the impetus of concupiscence to the will of the first man, a move of marked importance in the Augustinian tradition.

Both theologians see the unnatural concupiscence inherent in carnal generation as contributing to the propagation of original sin. For Augustine, this itself is the method of original sin's propagation. In violation of the will's rule over the soul, generation occurs and is thus subject to original sin. For Aquinas however, this is only the method by which Adam's will moves his descendants, and thus makes them subject to original sin as participators in his nature. Thus, the distinction between the will (Augustine) and the nature (Aquinas) as to the location of the prime subject of original sin.

However, before getting into a lengthy discussion it is also important to note (which is far too long a discussion for the OP) the somewhat divergent theological views between Augustine and Aquinas on "original justice" - which underpin their somewhat different views on Original Sin. I'm pretty much ignoring Anselm here - while his views are interesting - it is Aquinas' "completion" of Anselm's views which are dominant in the Western Church.

When reading all the various documents one does not find Anselm using Augustine’s term for guilt, reatus, though that is the word that the Council of Trent will use, perhaps pointedly, in its formal teaching on original guilt. Instead, Anselm speaks of the culpa, the fault or blame that each of us bears. The sin of Adam has made all of us accountable. We are all responsible for the sin committed at the origin of our nature, liable for the debt (debitum) which that sin incurred, and yet, to a person, incapable of paying the debt.

Aquinas' views can obviously be found in the Summa. However, the best explanation of Anselm is not found in Why God Became Man, but rather its sequel: On the Virgin Conception and Original Sin.

 

[Reminiscent]

Don’t you see you’re predicament?

Yes. There are sinners who reject God's Word, but by the Holy Spirit my brothers and sisters in Christ stand firm.

If you’re sinful nature is not you’re fault, then why repent?

The reason you repent is because the human race is responsible for its choices it makes. The human race began with Adam and so all men and women are born into sin which causes us to sin. We don't repent of being born into sin, but of sinning. You don't have to repent for Adam's sin, for he is responsible for his own sin. You do have to repent though for not accepting salvation from sin that you commit. It's a beautiful redemptive design.

More importantly, if you’re sinful nature is not you’re fault, how can you repent?

Your sinful nature is now your own, but not because you made it, but because you are given it when you were physically born. That is not your fault you were born, it is your fault if you don't receive salvation, because remember, you have a spirit of God-consciousness and are without excuse for not receiving God's love.

God is Justice; can He not separate the inequity of one person from that of another?

He separates the inequity of one person from another by requiring each person to receive the salvation. Therefore, Adam's sin causing you to be born into sin, you are not blamed for being born into sin by Adam, only in not receiving salvation.

I think that what God told Cain is absolutely true, and wasn’t Cain the son of Adam?

Cain was told by God that he needs to give right offering to be saved. Just as Adam was disobedient, so was Cain. They both chose hell of their own accord. Cain was never blamed for being born of his father; he is to be judged for refusing salvation which is why he murdered.

Didn’t God tell Cain, although sin is waiting for you, you can master it?

No. God never said he could master it, for only God has the power to provide deliverance; thus, Cain was suppose to give right offering (free-will offering), but refused to. Abel gave right offering.

God didn’t tell Cain, you are a sinner because your father sinned and therefore you are destined to sin; no, He told Cain, although sin is an option and you maybe tempted by it, you can master it!

Yes, God told Cain that he was a sinner because his father is a sinner, so that is why God said He needed a right offering, because all that is born of the flesh is flesh.

What you are promoting is mastering sin by self-strength, but don't realize you don't have the power to master sin. This is called salvation by works and is delusional. A sinner can't save himself. Anyone who is of the flesh sins. There are no exceptions. Only by right offering (coming to the cross as a helpless sinner to receive Jesus as Lord and Savior) can grace enter to receive power over sin.

Also after the flood, God doesn’t say He won’t destroy the world again because people are born to sin. He says that people desire sin even from their youth, meaning that although they could choose not to sin, they are weak and choose to sin.

God never destroyed the world at Noah's flood; it was a local flood. In Genesis 1:2 though He did flood the whole world because of the sin of the inhabitants of Earth's earliest ages.

The reason God caused the local flood was not because we are all born into sin, for this is already a fact known at Gen. 6:3 as evident by sin leads to death and all flesh must die. We are all born of the flesh.

The reason for the flood was because the level of sin reached such proportions it was the only possible remedy in those days; the reason why the flood won't happen again is because of God's grace by the work of the cross has entered, and the veil is now rent.

The flesh doesn’t make you sin. This is why we repent, because although we can master sin, we are weak or don’t love God, and choose not to master sin.

The flesh is the sin of the body and the self of the soul in its selfishness. If you are born this way, then you cannot avoid sinning, and this is proven by the fact that not a single person in human history has not sinned. No exceptions!

The flesh makes you sin. You are compelled to sin. God therefore treats the flesh as it truly is: it must die! It cannot be reformed or refined or beautified. It is utterly corruptible and it only has one place-its very destruction!

We can not master sin! What we can do is let God's life work in us to render sin powerless by the grace of God. We repent firstly to come to the cross to receive God's gift of eternal life so that our spirit is quickened by the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit may come through the window of our conscience to indwell our new life.

If you don't go through this first stage to enter the new creation to receive eternal life today, then your attempt to master sin is vain and pretentious. The reason you choose to not overcome so that sin is not your master is because you seek to be the master which is refusing God's perfect salvation, starting with your denying original sin. If you don't accept original sin, it is your master. Sin has the nasty habit of going dormant only to resurface because the sinner did not let the cross deal with it according to God's design.

In my understanding, the whole concept of original sin is flawed.

When you try to understand with your corrupted mind, you will reach nefarious conclusions. You will need to give up your soul in order to gain it.

 

[Reminiscent]

If I recall, the guilt concept began with St Augustines writings. But that may have been some of the ones he recanted later.

All sin is guilt ridden, for that is why forgiveness is needed. It is not an isolated Augustine thing.

The east doesn't associate guilt with Adams sin. Sin is merely missing the mark, as created beings we do that.

Christians in the east do associate guilt with Adam's sin in that if you do not accept God's salvation from being born into this sin, you will be most guilty.

The blood on the doorposts simply represented (token) faith.

No. This is real faith.

As Exodus 12:13 says, "a token" and "when I SEE" it I will pass over you.

Exoldus 12:13 does not say mean token as a minimalist thing, but "The blood shall be a sign for you" (v.13 RSV, ESV, Darby, Youngs, NIV and NLT agree). Be careful with old KJV language otherwise you will misunderstanding its meaning.

To me this is a type in that Christ also came looking for "faith".

For those who by faith accept the precious blood on the doorposts and lentils of their hearts shall be saved.

"............ Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" Luke 18:8

He finds it in every century.

 

[Reminiscent]

This is true. In the context of the West, however, it really got turbocharged with Aquinas via Anslem.

There is guilt offerings in the OT and sacrifices. A seared conscience senses no guilt, denying the sins one commits.