Are there any churches that don't believe in original sin?

[annsni]

I'm talking about any churches that have that as their doctrine that they teach. Not individual churches but denominations or whatever. Someone was asking on another board and I couldn't think of any.

 

[Olivencia]

I understand that it is quite pervasive among members of the church of Christ. They throw a hissy if I refer to them as a "denomination" or that they have a "creed"

 

[annsni]

I understand that it is quite pervasive among members of the church of Christ. They throw a hissy if I refer to them as a "denomination" or that they have a "creed"

Is it a part of their statement of beliefs or something? I'll go check it out.

 

[Darron Steele]

I understand that it is quite pervasive among members of the church of Christ. They throw a hissy if I refer to them as a "denomination" or that they have a "creed"

Is it a part of their statement of beliefs or something? I'll go check it out.

The Churches of Christ do not have a "statement of beliefs" -- but they do have unwritten codes of
a) religious precepts that must be accepted,
b) religious precepts that must be rejected
for individual members to be deemed `sound' or `faithful' or whatever word they use for acceptability.

 

[Alive in Christ]

Ann,

I'm pretty sure the Unitarian Universalists deny original sin. Not sure, but I think so.

I'll check on it...

>>>"EDIT"<<<

Ok. Here it is.

These are a few of the apostate Unitarian Universalist beliefs that are pure heresy, including what you are asking about...

"Unitarian Universalists do not have any stated doctrinal belief concerning the existence or nature of a god. It is entirely the prerogative of each individual to determine what, if any, concept of deity they wish to accept. Historically, Unitarians rejected the traditional Christian doctrine of the Trinity as polytheistic. Currently, however, some Unitarian Universalists profess belief in gods and goddesses of various numbers and kinds.


Unitarian Universalists reject the biblical doctrine of original sin. They teach that basically all people are good and have no need for spiritual redemption from the effects of sin.

"Doctrinally, Universalism's principle theological contribution lies in striking hell from the theological sense. Complementing this, Unitarianism (in addition to affirming God's oneness) removed original sin. Together they conspire brilliantly on behalf of goodness." (John A. Buehrens and Forrest Church, A Chosen Faith-An Introduction to Unitarian Universalism)


In the last century, most Unitarian Universalists maintained that human reason, intuition, and scientific research were the only reliable sources for discovering all truth. Generally, they rejected supernatural sources of knowledge-especially divine sources of revelation such as the Bible or other religious texts.

Nonetheless, in recent decades, many neo-pagan Unitarian Universalists have accepted supernatural beliefs that defy naturalistic presuppositions. According to Marta Flanagan,
The living tradition that we share draws from many sources:

Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;

Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
Wisdom from the world's religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God's love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;

Humanist teachings that counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit.
Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions that celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature. (Marta Flanagan, We Are Unitarian Universalists, http://www.uua.org/bookstore/weare.html)

:godisgood:

 

[Gup20]

I'm talking about any churches that have that as their doctrine that they teach. Not individual churches but denominations or whatever. Someone was asking on another board and I couldn't think of any.

Can you define "original sin"?

 

[Rippon]

Can you define "original sin"?

Well, for starters go to Romans 5:12-19. If you affirm that the Scriptures do indeed teach it -- then you are being biblical -- if, on the other hand you deny Holy Writ that will be problematic for you.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Well, for starters go to Romans 5:12-19. If you affirm that the Scriptures do indeed teach it -- then you are being biblical -- if, on the other hand you deny Holy Writ that will be problematic for you.

I love this phrase. Just saying. Holy is refrencing Sacred which is defined as "1 a: dedicated or set apart" and Writ refering to writings. Which is wonderfully anonymous. Any writing that is set apart for something specific or dedicated to that purpose can be considered Holy Writ. :laugh:

BTW I think the Orthodox and the Copts don't view original sin the way we do.

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

I'm talking about any churches that have that as their doctrine that they teach. Not individual churches but denominations or whatever. Someone was asking on another board and I couldn't think of any.

Besides Unity and the Universalists, the only one I could think of might be the United Church of Christ. See www.ucc.org for information.

 

[billwald]

went there

>Well, for starters go to Romans 5:12-19.

It teaches that all humans will sin, not that all humans are born guilty of sin e.g. sinners. We are born with the potential and will fulfill the potential.

 

[Gup20]

Well, for starters go to Romans 5:12-19. If you affirm that the Scriptures do indeed teach it -- then you are being biblical -- if, on the other hand you deny Holy Writ that will be problematic for you.

I have an idea of what Original Sin is, and I know what Romans 5 says, but neither of these are an answer to my question. The term "original sin" does not appear in Romans 5, therefore "original sin" is a collection of ideas external to Romans 5 meant to explain a particular Biblical concept.

I asked Annsni to define it so that we would all be dealing with the same information. Whomever invented the term "original sin" may have had a different idea of what it entailed than does Annsni, or you, or I do. If a definition of what is meant by the term "original sin" can be given, we can answer the original post's question - Are there any churches that don't believe in original sin? - more accurately.

To you, Rippon I would ask you to give us your definition of "it" (from your statement above) as well. Also, does your term "holy writ" limit itself to the 66 books of the Bible, or does it also include other Canonical documents?

 

[steaver]

Ann,

I'm pretty sure the Unitarian Universalists deny original sin. Not sure, but I think so.

I'll check on it...



:godisgood:

I believe Ann was speaking of "Christian" churches. Those who confess Jesus Christ is Lord (capital L, God)

:jesus:

 

[steaver]

I have an idea of what Original Sin is, and I know what Romans 5 says, but neither of these are an answer to my question. The term "original sin" does not appear in Romans 5, therefore "original sin" is a collection of ideas external to Romans 5 meant to explain a particular Biblical concept.

I asked Annsni to define it so that we would all be dealing with the same information. Whomever invented the term "original sin" may have had a different idea of what it entailed than does Annsni, or you, or I do. If a definition of what is meant by the term "original sin" can be given, we can answer the original post's question - Are there any churches that don't believe in original sin? - more accurately.

I always thought "original sin" was the doctrine of how sin entered the world. Adam sinned (The Original Sin) and therefore sin passed to all living.

:jesus:

 

[Agnus_Dei]

I'm talking about any churches that have that as their doctrine that they teach. Not individual churches but denominations or whatever. Someone was asking on another board and I couldn't think of any.

The Orthodox Christian Church has a different view of Original Sin as does the West, which may be outlined as follows:

In the Orthodox Faith, the term "original sin" refers to the "first" sin of Adam and Eve. As a result of this sin, humanity bears the "consequences" of sin, the chief of which is death. Here the word "original" may be seen as synonymous with "first." Hence, the "original sin" refers to the "first sin" in much the same way as "original chair" refers to the "first chair."

In the West, humanity likewise bears the "consequences" of the "original sin" of Adam and Eve. However, the West also understands that humanity is likewise "guilty" of the sin of Adam and Eve. The term "Original Sin" here refers to the condition into which humanity is born, a condition in which guilt as well as consequence is involved.

In the Orthodox Christian understanding, while humanity does bear the consequences of the original, or first, sin, humanity does not bear the personal guilt associated with this sin. Adam and Eve are guilty of their willful action; we bear the consequences, chief of which is death.

One might look at all of this in a completely different light. Imagine, if you will, that one of your close relatives was a mass murderer. He committed many serious crimes for which he was found guilty, and perhaps even admitted his guilt publicly. You, as his or her son or brother or cousin, may very well bear the consequences of his action - people may shy away from you or say, "Watch out for him - he comes from a family of mass murderers." Your name may be tainted, or you may face some other forms of discrimination as a consequence of your relative’s sin. You, however, are not personally guilty of his or her sin.

In XC
-

 

[Gup20]

I always thought "original sin" was the doctrine of how sin entered the world. Adam sinned (The Original Sin) and therefore sin passed to all living.

Yes, but are we defining "original sin" as just the first sin?
Are we talking about the original sin as the Catholics see it - that we all participate in the first sin by heredity (sometimes called ancestral sin)?
Are we talking about the automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt?
Are we talking about inheriting sin distinct from our own committed sins?
Are we talking about original sin being the actual cause behind us sinning?
Are we talking about Original Sin as the Roman Catholics (who invented the phrase) define it?
Are we talking about Original Sin as Judaism (which doesn't believe in original sin) take it?
If we are talking about inheriting a "sin nature" what we are really saying is that we share in the guilt of Adam for his action. Are we saying that we bear the guilt of Adam's action, or are we made sinners when we ourselves first sin?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin

I've made the argument on other threads that Romans 5:12 doesn't say "sin is passed" it says "death is passed".

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
​

But there are certainly those who disagree with this scripture and say that sin was passed. They say that sin is passed via Adam in that we share the guilt of Adam's first sin because we are descended from Adam.

I personally think this disagrees with scripture:

Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
​

Therefore, I disagree with ancestral sin, and the Roman Catholic definition of Original Sin, and some of the people here who say that "sin is passed" rather than "death is passed" as Romans 5:12 says.

This is why I ask annsni to define "original sin". It means many different things to many different people.

 

[Gup20]

The Orthodox Christian Church has a different view of Original Sin as does the West, which may be outlined as follows:

In the Orthodox Faith, the term "original sin" refers to the "first" sin of Adam and Eve. As a result of this sin, humanity bears the "consequences" of sin, the chief of which is death. Here the word "original" may be seen as synonymous with "first." Hence, the "original sin" refers to the "first sin" in much the same way as "original chair" refers to the "first chair."

In the West, humanity likewise bears the "consequences" of the "original sin" of Adam and Eve. However, the West also understands that humanity is likewise "guilty" of the sin of Adam and Eve. The term "Original Sin" here refers to the condition into which humanity is born, a condition in which guilt as well as consequence is involved.

In the Orthodox Christian understanding, while humanity does bear the consequences of the original, or first, sin, humanity does not bear the personal guilt associated with this sin. Adam and Eve are guilty of their willful action; we bear the consequences, chief of which is death.

One might look at all of this in a completely different light. Imagine, if you will, that one of your close relatives was a mass murderer. He committed many serious crimes for which he was found guilty, and perhaps even admitted his guilt publicly. You, as his or her son or brother or cousin, may very well bear the consequences of his action - people may shy away from you or say, "Watch out for him - he comes from a family of mass murderers." Your name may be tainted, or you may face some other forms of discrimination as a consequence of your relative’s sin. You, however, are not personally guilty of his or her sin.

In XC
-

While I cannot speak to the accuracy of the history of your post, the content is quite eloquently, simply, and succinctly stated.

I would wholeheartedly agree with what you call the view of the Orthodox Faith in which humanity bears the consequences of the first sin, but not the guilt of the first sin. This is perfectly stated.

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
​

 

[steaver]

Gup:

If we are talking about inheriting a "sin nature" what we are really saying is that we share in the guilt of Adam for his action. Are we saying that we bear the guilt of Adam's action, or are we made sinners when we ourselves first sin?

I don't believe we are "really" saying anything more than by the fallen state of nature we sin even from the womb. I believe that by the fallen state of nature we sin, not that anyone is guilty of another's sin. In other words, we are "by nature" bent on sinning from the womb. This is why two year olds lust after each others stuff, they have that sin nature and the curse of death.

I believe Romans 5:12 taken in it's entirety says just this.

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
​

1) sin entered
2) death by sin
3) death passed upon ALL
4) for (or because) ALL have sinned

How does a baby experience desease, say cancer, and die without sin causing that death? The scripture states "death by sin".

:jesus:

 

[Alive in Christ]

Steaver,

"I believe Ann was speaking of "Christian" churches. Those who confess Jesus Christ is Lord (capital L, God)"

Thats probably the case, but in her original post she simply said "churches", as opposed to "christian churches".

So I thought I'd throw that out there just in case she meant ANY groups that consider themselves to be "churches".


:godisgood:

 

[annsni]

Steaver,



Thats probably the case, but in her original post she simply said "churches", as opposed to "christian churches".

So I thought I'd throw that out there just in case she meant ANY groups that consider themselves to be "churches".


:godisgood:

Normally this would be the case but I'm asking the question because it came up on a secular board I'm on and I just didn't know ANY. I'm not familiar with a lot of the non-Christian churches and I'm not sure how much you guys would be either but I'll take any religious organization that claims itself to be a "church".

 

[Gup20]

I don't believe we are "really" saying anything more than by the fallen state of nature we sin even from the womb. I believe that by the fallen state of nature we sin, not that anyone is guilty of another's sin. In other words, we are "by nature" bent on sinning from the womb. This is why two year olds lust after each others stuff, they have that sin nature and the curse of death.

I agree with you that we have a "sin nature". I also agree with you that we develop this tendency towards sin at a very young age (even in the womb). But I also believe that we get this tendency through our fear of death. I would call "hunger", for example, a fear of death. The only point I would have is that we do not inherit "sin". We do inherit death.

Hbr 2:14 Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; 15 And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.

I believe Romans 5:12 taken in it's entirety says just this.

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
​

1) sin entered
2) death by sin
3) death passed upon ALL
4) for (or because) ALL have sinned

How does a baby experience desease, say cancer, and die without sin causing that death? The scripture states "death by sin".

Just as Agnus_Dei has said... the consequences of Adam's sin are shared by all (the Curse, for example), whereas the guilt of that sin is Adam's alone. Each of us are guilty of our own sin when we, through fear of death, tend to sin. Are we born with that tendency to sin? Absolutely. Why? Because we inherit sin? No, but because we inherit death, and we fear death, therefore we tend to sin.

An example would be a baby who is hungry and cries for his mother's milk. The baby can feel the effects of death - hunger - and cries to have it's own needs met.