Featured Original Sin??? #1

Let's face it, the difference between Calvinism and non Calvinism is centered on the effects of the "fall" upon mankind. What do Baptists traditionally hold on this subject? I have found several interesting articles that might surprise many here. Here is the first from Dr. J. W. "Jack" MacGorman;

Source- http://peterlumpkins.typepad.com/pe...nevitably-leading-to-heresy-if-not-worse.html

 

This quote summarizes it all;

 

And what is Original Sin? The teaching of Augustine, based on a flawed Latin text.

 

Oh, I believe when Adam sinned he spiritually died. That is why God had to make skins from an animal to cover his sin, a figure of Christ who would die for man.

But Romans 5:12 does not say all men died in Adam, it says death passed upon all men "for that all have sinned". This is speaking of personal sin.

As Dr. MacGorman pointed out, Paul demonstrated that all men were sinners from Romans 1:18 to Romans 3:20 and never once mentioned Adam, but taught all men die for their own personal sin.

 

I believe Dr. MacGowan makes a tremendous argument that in context Paul showed all men were sinners from Rom 1:18-3:20 because of personal sin without mentioning Adam as the cause. Therefore, Rom 5:12 cannot be teaching that men sinned "in Adam" as Augustine falsely interpreted from a known flawed Latin text.

 

Obviously it is not so simple or this debate would not continue for fifteen hundred years as it has.

But then, I'm not a prophet.

 

Amazing, a seminary professor that has taught Greek for over 50 years says Romans 5:12-21 is one of the most difficult and distorted passages in all scripture, you say it is simple.

That IS a good gift you have.

 

No, but some seem to worship self.

 

Tell me prophet, which is worse?

 

Not so, to worship God and his Son Jesus is what all men should do. To worship self is what the devil does.

 

Agreed. But respecting a scholar is not worship. And if you knew me, you would know that I would challenge many a so-called "scholar".

That said, I myself have studied Romans 5:12-21 for many years. I have my own interpretation of this passage, that it is explaining that both Adam and Jesus were "legal precedents". Those who sin as Adam sin are judged "sinners" and condemned to death as Adam was. Adam was the first. Likewise, Jesus is the legal precedent for those who believe in God, as Jesus trusted his Father to raise him from the dead. Those who trust in Jesus are imputed righteous.

Now, that is MY view, and I doubt you would see that interpretation from many, but that is what I believe this passage is teaching.

I simply think (and agree) that Dr. MacGorman's reasoning and interpretation was solid and logical. It is a very strong and scholarly argument that Paul did not mention Adam even once in Romans 1:18-3:20 where the context was the sinfulness and lost condition of all men. Surely, if all men "died in Adam" as Original Sin teaches, Paul would have mentioned it, but he did not.

But I guess from now on when I encounter difficult scripture I should just send you a PM and you will give me an easy answer.