Featured Original Sin??? #1

This argument is laughable it is so bad.

Albert Barnes correctly shows that Romans 5:14 argues against Original Sin because it says men from Adam to Moses did not sin in a similar or like way as Adam.

Your argument is that they sinned in EXACTLY the same way as Adam. You can't get any more similar than that.

Your argument is plain foolish and nobody is buying it. Give it up. You are obviously playing word games.

 

Not really, because it is obvious you are being very stubborn and obstinate, and it is also obvious you are trying to play word games. Paul says that men from Adam to Moses DID NOT sin like Adam. Adam sinned against a direct command, men from Adam to Moses sinned against the law written on their hearts. Paul is not saying they sinned "in Adam", else they would have sinned in EXACTLY the same manner as Adam. You can't get any more similar than exact.

And again, if Paul were trying to prove Original Sin in Romans 5:14 as you suggest, then it would apply to ALL MEN, not men from Adam to Moses only.

You are just being stubborn and trying to wrest scripture, it won't work, and nobody with a lick of common sense is going to buy your fallacious argument.

It is you that is playing with the word similitude, give it up man, you are being pathetic.

Barnes simply interpreted this passage honestly. And I am sure he understood the definition of similitude better than you.

Again, Dr. MacGorman says that any interpretation of Romans 5:12-21 that contradicts Romans 1:18-3:20 cannot be correct. In these scriptures Paul repeatedly shows men die for personal sin and not Adam. Adam is not mentioned once.

It was Augustine with a flawed Latin text that misinterpreted Romans 5, and many still are deceived by this serious error to this day.

 

This is pure baloney, show where I have even once in this thread debated about the definition of the word "similitude". You can't do it, because I have not debated over it's definition. Similitude simply means similar, or in like manner.

If a man is guilty of Original Sin, then he has sinned in the similitude of Adam. He has sinned in a similar manner as Adam. In fact, he has sinned EXACTLY like Adam if men are guilty of Original Sin.

Romans 5:14 says men from Adam to Moses DID NOT sin in a similar manner as Adam. Therefore, they could not have committed Original Sin. Romans 5:14 utterly refutes that all men sinned in Adam's loins when he sinned. They did not sin in the same manner or likeness of Adam.

Men from Adam to Moses committed all sorts of sins. They lied, they stole, they murdered, they committed adultery. But one thing they did not do is eat from the tree of knowledge, and they did not sin against a direct command given from God as Adam did. This is what Romans 5:14 is saying.

So why did they die? Because they sinned against the law written on their heart, just as Paul explained in Romans chapter 2.

 

Sin itself did not cause their physical death, because they could have eaten the tree of life and lived forever as sinners. Isn't that what the scripture says?

They and we die as a consequence of sin because man was sent out of the garden. That is actually a blessing, as physical death is man's greatest incentive to come to God.

We physically die because of Adam's sin, we spiritually die for our own sin.

Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

Paul was spiritually alive until he learned the law. When he learned the law he was convicted as a sinner and spiritually died. He did not spiritually die because of Adam, he died for his own sin. He was not born dead in sin, and he did not spiritually die because of Adam's sin.

Yes, sin caused their spiritual death that day. They did not physically die until over 900 years later.

Correct, they could have lived forever as sinners. If sin causes physical death, then eating the tree of life would not have helped them.

Sin brings spiritual death.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Romans 9:11 shows that babies have not sinned in the womb. Do babies physically die? YES. Therefore sin does not cause physical death.

We die physically as a consequence of sin. It is like a drunk bus driver driving off a cliff, all his passengers die as a consequence of his sin, but they did not participate in his sin and are not guilty of his sin.

Well, Revelation says the leaves of the tree are for healing. What is dispensational about that? Many medicines are made from leaves.

Well, I agree, we will have to wait until we fully understand these things. But Revelation does suggest that the leaves of the tree of life have physical healing powers. Perhaps they prevent aging and disease??

Eating the tree of life would not give you a good nature, that is why God chased Adam and Eve out of the garden. It would prevent you from physically dying.

It was the innocent animal that was slain to make coats that covered them that was a figure of Jesus.

Thank you, this was a good post for me too. :thumbs:

 

God himself said that if they ate of the tree of life they would live forever. So sin would not have caused their physical death. God had to send them out of the garden to cause their physical death.

If sin causes physical death, then eating the tree of life would be useless to save them, they would die anyway. Isn't that true?

And again, Romans 9:11 shows babies have not sinned in the womb.

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; )

Paul said Jacob and Esau had done no evil in their mother's womb. This shows babies are not sinners. Do babies die in the womb? Yes, millions, if not billions of babies have died in the womb. Sin did not cause their physical death, Paul shows babies have not sinned.

And Paul refutes Original Sin as well. If Jacob and Esau were in Adam's loins and sinned in the garden when Adam sinned, then it would be error to say they had done no evil in Romans 9:11, but that is exactly what Paul says.

You will get folks that say Levi paid tithes to Melchisedec in Abraham's loins to prove Original Sin.

Heb 7:9 And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.
10 For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.

This verse is not actually teaching that Levi was in Abraham's loins and literally paid tithes to Melchisedec. If so, this would prove that not only are we guilty of Adam's first sin, but EVERY sin he committed, and EVERY SIN of all of our grandfathers up until our father. We would literally be guilty of millions of sins our ancestors committed.

No, the writer of Hebrews is just showing the superior priesthood of Jesus, as he was in the order of Melchisedec. Levi was a son or descendant of Abraham. The father is superior to the son. So when Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec, it proved Melchisedec and Jesus were superior to the priesthood of Levi. That is all this scripture is teaching, it is not teaching that we all sinned or even did good things in our father's loins. This scripture does not support Original Sin whatsoever.

But... if we actually do commit real sin in our father's loins when they sin, then Paul could not have said that Jacob and Esau had done no evil.

So, Romans 9:11 utterly refutes Original Sin and that we all sinned with Adam.

 

I understand, but sin does not directly cause physical death. It was because Adam and Eve were chased out of the garden that they died 900 years later.

Again, babies have not sinned, Paul directly tells you this in Romans 9:11. But millions of babies physically die. Therefore sin did not cause their physical death.

They die as a consequence of Adam's sin, just as an innocent person might die as the result or consequence of a drunk driver.

If sin caused physical death, eating from the tree of life would not prevent you from physically dying.

Why can't you understand that?

 

Again, read this chapter carefully and it is obvious Romans 5 is speaking of spiritual death, not physical. Look at all the terms used;

Sinners, reconciled, enemies, atonement, condemnation, judgment, transgression, offense, grace, gift, righteousness, grace, justification, free gift, etc...

These are all legal terms. Romans 5 is not speaking of physical death.

Now go to 1 Corinthians chapter 15 and you will see it is speaking of physical death, it speaks about the body and corruption, being buried, being sowed, being raised, flesh of men, beasts, fishes, and birds, etc... These are terms about the physical body and physical death.

So Romans 5 is not teaching that babies die because Adam's sin passed on them as Augustine falsely interpreted from a KNOWN flawed Latin text (see the OP).