The Original Sin

[servantx]

So far I know that the original sin is:

1. Disobeying God's command. (eg, eating the forbidden fruit)
2. Try to be like God (eg. To gain the knowledge of good and evil)
3. Listened and followed the Serpent.

Anything else to add on?

 

[prodromos]

I believe a major part of the sin of Adam which is often overlooked is the fact that he tried to shift the responsibility of his actions rather than repent and admit his fault. God gave Adam and Eve a chance to repent and they blew it, instead blaming either God Himself or the serpent;
"The woman you gave to me, she gave me of the tree and I ate"
"The serpent deceived me and I ate"

John

 

[5stringJeff]

Obviously, the original sin lies with Eve, who was the first to eat of the forbidden fruit.

 

[crzy4god]

=)

 

[linssue55]

So far I know that the original sin is:

1. Disobeying God's command. (eg, eating the forbidden fruit)
2. Try to be like God (eg. To gain the knowledge of good and evil)
3. Listened and followed the Serpent.

Anything else to add on?

The FIRST original sins was by Satan....the 5 "I Will" sins..... From there, man was created to solve the angelic conflict.

 

[holyrokker]

Adam had also been commanded to care for the Garden. He failed there by allowing the serpent to sneak about.

 

[~Nikki~]

I guess Adam was also guilty of idolatry.

After Eve had eaten the fruit, he had to choose to obey God, or be like his wife.

He chose his wife over God...

Good job God had plans for salvation in place, hey?

 

[DeaconDean]

If you are refering to man's first original sin, then it was Eve telling a lie. Here it is to prove my point:

[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? [/font]
[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: [/font]
3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. (Gen. 3:1-3)

Here's what God actually said:

[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: [/font]
2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Gen. 2:16-17)



Eve lied to the serpent first! Before she took of the fruit and eat of it. God never said they couldn't touch it, no, they could not eat of it.

Now as to the very first sin ever, Satan while in heaven. "I will exhalt my throne above the stars of God:...I will be like the most high. (Isa. 14:13-14) Pride was Satan's first down fall-Isa. 14:12-17. Then we see that Vanity made him fall too: Eze. 28:13-18.

 

[depthdeception]

If you are refering to man's first original sin, then it was Eve telling a lie. Here it is to prove my point:

[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]3:1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? [/font]
[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: [/font]
3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. (Gen. 3:1-3)

Here's what God actually said:

[font=Arial, Geneva, Helvetica]2:16 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: [/font]
2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. (Gen. 2:16-17)



Eve lied to the serpent first! Before she took of the fruit and eat of it. God never said they couldn't touch it, no, they could not eat of it.

Oh, come on! Eve was not lying, simply because she used the word "touch". THe meaning is the same, even though the words are different. The point of the story is that Adam and Eve disobeyed God, not that Eve lied to the serpent. After all, God doesn't condemn Eve for "lying" to the serpent; rather Adam and Eve are expelled from the Garden because of disobedience.

 

[DeaconDean]

Once again with the scriptures confronting someone, they bash a person. Scriptures clearly say, "thou shalt not eat of it", God didn't say thou shalt not touch it. Why do people bash others when confronted with God word? Thats not my words, but God's own. Bottom line is: Eve lied when she told the serpent "God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die." Granted Eve sinned when she took the fruit and ate it, and Adam sinned when he put Eve in front of God's commands, but nevertheless, Eve lied! God NEVER told them they couldn't touch it. But I guess the act of eating it involves touching so i guess this is where everybody slams everybody else. I'm so tired of the bashing. I'm out of here, and seriously considering quitting this forum. All you people want to do is tell people how wrong they are if they don't subscribe to your particular point of view.

 

[thehayesman]

O K Who votes Deacon Dean has some rage issues?? Anywho, we need to define our use of the term "original sin," the term "sin," and the term "original." I think that the first instance of disobedience listed, as a specific act, would be Eve telling half-truths to the Serpent..if you say that's what she was doing. The first disobedience that brought judgement and death into the world was when Adam took the apple from Eve and ate. Adam, not Eve, was charged with the command of God to keep the garden and not eat from that tree.

The concept of "original sin," however, is another matter altogether, as I don't believe this refers to an act, but a change of spirit toward God...the breaking of the relationship between God/man and man/fellow man, that could not be repaired except by Christ.

How would you (anyone) define these terms?

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

MY view...


Original Sin is that twisted, selfish aspect of human nature that is separate from
God. I see it rather like a disease - a spiritual, moral disease that is now, sadly, a part of our fallen nature.

We point to the account of Genesis 3 for the origins of such, but exactly, percisely what there constitutes the begininng of it is kinda hard to tell. Perhaps it's a package deal, lol. In any case, WHATEVER the origin may be, it's real.

Diseases tend to have symptoms. So does sin. They are called sins (well, technically "actual sin" or "actualized sin"). These can be by thought or word or deed, by omission or comission. But they are really just the symptom of the underlying sin. Some people may be able to control the symptoms (occasionally very well) but just as I still have a cold even if I don't happen to be sneezing just now, so I'm still sinful even if I'm not actually breaking any of the BIG TEN at the moment.


Some of the verses I'm thinking about:

1 John 3:4
Galatians 5:19-21
Romans 3:12
Matthew 5:28
Matthew 12:36
Romans 1:32
Psalm 51:3
Romans 3:23


MY view...


Keep the faith! Share the love!


- Josiah


.

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Rom 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--
13. for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
14. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
15. But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.
16. The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.
17. For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18. So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19. For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous. (NASB, 1995)

 

[armothe]

and so death spread to all men, because all sinned

Important to note that death spread to all men because they all sinned, not because one person sinned.

-A

 

[PrincetonGuy]

Important to note that death spread to all men because they all sinned, not because one person sinned.

-A

No, Paul is arguing precisely the opposite.



Rom. 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--

13. for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.



Paul argues here that we all sinned in Adam, the proof being that we all die, including those who were lived before the Law was given, and sin is not imputed when there is no law. Therefore, the ONLY sin for which those who sinned before the Law was given would have paid the penalty of death is the sin that they committed in Adam. Although the Law had not yet been given when Adam sinned, he was specifically told by God,



Gen. 2:16. The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely;

17. but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

 

[msortwell]

Agreed, all have sinned in Adam, and bear the guilt of that sin.

Our redemption in Christ (as a new federal head) is inextricably linked the the same principle as our original sin in Adam.

1 Cor 15:22, For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. KJV


Blessings,

Mike

 

[Eruliel]

This is bizarre. I'm reading this post and listening to Les Miserables, and just as I'm about to post Fantine sings "There was a time when it all went wrong". LOL!!! How true though hmmm? Odd coinkydink

As far as Eve lying to the serpent...she wasn't told by God not to eat from the tree. Notice: Chapter 2 verse 9 God puts the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil and the Tree of Life in the Middle of the Garden, Vs. 7- Adam is created. Verses 15-16- God puts Adam in the Garden and tells him not to eat from the tree, Vs 18- God decides it's not good for Adam to be alone, Vs 20- God finds there is no suitable mate for Adam in the creation yet, so he puts Adam to sleep and creates Eve.
God created Eve AFTER he told Adam not to eat of the tree, and Gensis doesn't say that God repeated the command to Adam and Eve. As far as we know he only told Adam and left the job of informing Eve to him. So who misinterpreted what? Besides it wasn't a lie. It was a misunderstanding, a misinterpretation...something everyone does to the Bible (Gods Word) at some point. It creates problems, but it's not a sin.

Granted Eve knew better. She shouldn't have listened to the serpent, but it's not entirely her fault. In 3:6 it says that Adam was with her at the time she picked the fruit, so we have proof he was there while the Serpent was screwing with her head. So who's fault was it that Eve was led astray? Adam was set as the guardian of the Garden and all that was in it...that included his wife...and he failed.

But now we're back to laying the blame. As far as I'm concerned both Adam and Eve were at equal fault, and either way it made life stinky for the rest of us. Thank heaven for the second Adam hmmm?
Slainte!
Eruliel

 

[armothe]

No, Paul is arguing precisely the opposite.
Rom. 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--

13. for until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.
Paul argues here that we all sinned in Adam, the proof being that we all die, including those who were lived before the Law was given, and sin is not imputed when there is no law. Therefore, the ONLY sin for which those who sinned before the Law was given would have paid the penalty of death is the sin that they committed in Adam. Although the Law had not yet been given when Adam sinned, he was specifically told by God,

First I'd like to lend a distinction between original sin and inherited sin.

Original sin merely implies that there was a single, original sin, upon which its effects affected the entire universe. (I personally agree with this)

Inherited sin means that the sin and mistakes of Adam has been physically passed down or spiritually appointed to each person through the generations in which every person is born a sinner. (I personally disagree with this)

Second, you are making the mistake of equating sin solely with the mosaic law. Obviously this is not true. The mosaic law was given to the people so that they might more easily see that they were sinners. People have been sinning from the moment Adam and Eve sinned up until now - not because of some genetic inability - but rather because of observation, behavior and effects.

Third, you draw the conclusion that because everyone physically dies, everyone has sinned (because sin results in physical death). This is a bold assumption based on a too-literal translation of Genesis 3. Regardless of Adam and Eves sins, they would have eventually physically died. God did not create man (or anything else on this earth) with the intent to be immortal. Rather, Adam and Eve became spiritually dead at the point they sinned - as is the case today.

Last, verse 14 explains that even those who had not sinned still went to the Hadean realm. If anything this verse proves there were people who did not <have the opportunity to> sin yet were still placed in Hades until the time and fulfillment of Christ.

-A

 

[hlaltimus]

Original sin also means that in our origin, (I believe at conception,) we then and there possessed a sinful nature through our natural parents but from Adam the first. If this is true then babies who die and go to heaven, (and they do!) must themselves be cleansed from original sin by the blood of Jesus.

 

[armothe]

If this is true then babies who die and go to heaven, (and they do!) must themselves be cleansed from original sin by the blood of Jesus.

If you believe that sin is genetically inherited from the parents, how are infants (and unborn) cleansed by the blood of Jesus? How come 4 yr olds are not?

-A