Craig - I'm just curious and perhaps I misunderstand your post. Does this mean that in your view a person does or does not have a sin nature? If so, from where did it originate. If not, could a person live a sinless life and acheive heaven outside of Christ's work on the corss.
Hi Keith!
Let’s look at Rom. 5:12-21:
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.
20. The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more,
21. so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
This is the primary passage in the Bible from which many Christians teach the doctrine of original sin in one form or another. Taken completely out of context it would seem to clearly teach that doctrine, but when viewed in the context of the epistle as a whole, and especially the first eight chapters of that epistle, we see that Paul is arguing that the Law is not sufficient to justify the Jewish people in the sight of God, for everyone, Jew and Gentile alike, has sinned. And in these eight chapters Paul uses many figures of speech and literary devices to make that point.
And of course Paul makes a second point, most clearly stated in Rom. 8:3,
8:3. For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God
did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and
as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh,
In 58 A.D. the Jewish people understood the story of Adam in Genesis to be an historical narrative and Paul uses this understanding of the Jewish people to support his claim that the Jewish people had all sinned, whether in a personal manner, or in Adam. And to strengthen his claim, Paul reminds the Jews that people died before the Law was given and that their death was not, therefore, the consequence of their personal sin, but the sin that they committed when Adam sinned. The entire point of this was to prove to the Jews that they were stained with sin and in need of redemption, and that that redemption could be realized in their life only through a personal faith in Jesus.
Whether or not Adam was an historical figure is not the subject of Romans 5, and it is inconsequential to the central points of the chapter. We have all sinned and fallen short of the glory of God and, therefore, we are all in need of the redemption that can be found exclusively through faith in Christ.
Assuming for just a moment that Adam was a historical figure and that the sin of Adam was imputed to us, where in this do we find a sin nature? The obvious answer is that we don’t. The doctrine that man inherited a sin nature is what theologians call a “doctrine from speculation” based upon observation and philosophy. That is a very different kind of doctrine from what theologians call a “doctrine from exegesis.” A much newer doctrine from speculation is the doctrine that Christians have two natures, i.e., the nature that they inherited from Adam, and the nature that they received upon being “born again.” This latter doctrine is in direct conflict with the historical doctrine from exegesis that teaches that a “Christian” who has two natures is committing adultery with Christ. The primary biblical text for this doctrine is Rom 6:1 – 7:4, especially 7:1-4,
7:1. Or do you not know, brethren (for I am speaking to those who know the law), that the law has jurisdiction over a person as long as he lives?
2. For the married woman is bound by law to her husband while he is living; but if her husband dies, she is released from the law concerning the husband.
3. So then, if while her husband is living she is joined to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is not an adulteress though she is joined to another man.
4. Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God.
(All scriptures NASB, 1995)
