Does Denying Original Sin mean Denying the Cross?

[Winman]

I don't need to answer your post. It is based on this false premise.
There is not a book in the NT that is written to Jews. Every book is written to Christians, whether or not they have a Jewish or a Greek background is totally irrelevant. We are all one in Christ. In the first few verses of Romans 7 he takes an example from the law. But he is not speaking to Jews. He addresses his letter to "brethren," not to Jews. There is not a book in the NT that is written to the Jews.

Reading without comprehension is no different than being illiterate;

Rom 2:17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,
18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;
19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.
21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

Paul was addressing Jews in Romans.

 

[DHK]

Reading without comprehension is no different than being illiterate;

Rom 2:17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,
18 And knowest his will, and approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law;
19 And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,
20 An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.
21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

Paul was addressing Jews in Romans.

If you don't understand the Book of Romans then take a course in it.
Here is who Paul was writing to:

Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

That is the introduction, and they do not include Jews. There were no chapter divisions, therefore he is addressing the same "beloved of God, called to be saints" that he is addressing here.

In chapter one he describes the sinful state of all the Gentiles.
In chapter two he describes the sinful state of all the Jews.
In chapter three he describes the sinful state of Jews and Gentiles, together, that is the entire world, no one excluded.

The letter is addressed to the "saints" that are in Rome.
There is no letter or book in the NT addressed to the unsaved, that is, the Jews. Such a position is ludicrous. The Scriptures were given to believers who alone can understand them with the help of the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

Why would the Scriptures by addressed to the unsaved? It would be an act of futility.
1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[Winman]

If you don't understand the Book of Romans then take a course in it.
Here is who Paul was writing to:

Romans 1:7 To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ.

That is the introduction, and they do not include Jews. There were no chapter divisions, therefore he is addressing the same "beloved of God, called to be saints" that he is addressing here.

In chapter one he describes the sinful state of all the Gentiles.
In chapter two he describes the sinful state of all the Jews.
In chapter three he describes the sinful state of Jews and Gentiles, together, that is the entire world, no one excluded.

The letter is addressed to the "saints" that are in Rome.
There is no letter or book in the NT addressed to the unsaved, that is, the Jews. Such a position is ludicrous. The Scriptures were given to believers who alone can understand them with the help of the Holy Spirit.

1 Corinthians 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.

Why would the Scriptures by addressed to the unsaved? It would be an act of futility.
1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

I do not deny he was speaking to believers, but he spoke to Jews in Rome as well;

Acts 28:16 And when we came to Rome, the centurion delivered the prisoners to the captain of the guard: but Paul was suffered to dwell by himself with a soldier that kept him.
17 And it came to pass, that after three days Paul called the chief of the Jews together: and when they were come together, he said unto them, Men and brethren, though I have committed nothing against the people, or customs of our fathers, yet was I delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.
18 Who, when they had examined me, would have let me go, because there was no cause of death in me.
19 But when the Jews spake against it, I was constrained to appeal unto Caesar; not that I had ought to accuse my nation of.
20 For this cause therefore have I called for you, to see you, and to speak with you: because that for the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain.
21 And they said unto him, We neither received letters out of Judaea concerning thee, neither any of the brethren that came shewed or spake any harm of thee.
22 But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest: for as concerning this sect, we know that every where it is spoken against.
23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.
24 And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.
25 And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers,
26 Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:
27 For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them.
28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.
29 And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.
30 And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,
31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.

Paul is hardly going to say to Gentiles;

Rom 2:17 Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,

 

[Aaron]

For if we are not sinners at birth, do not have the sin nature until we actually choose to sin, that means that we would have the capability to not sin as Jesus did, and be saved by our own good works?

Of course.

 

[Winman]

Of course.

Having the capacity to do something, and doing it are two different things.

Is it possible for a baseball player to hit 1.000? Yes. Has any player with more than 50 at bats ever hit 1.000? NO.

Now, if a fellow only bats 3 times and gets 3 hits, he hit 1.000, but I doubt that even that has ever been done. But this would be comparable to a baby that died.

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; )

How many sins had Jacob and Esau committed in their mother's womb? ZERO.

Do babies ever die in their mother's womb? YES, millions if not billions since the history of the world.

This would explain the 99 just persons who never went astray, and need no repentance, and the elder son who never transgressed his father's commandment at any time.

Mat 18:12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?
13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.
14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

Here Jesus spoke of 99 sheep that never went astray. Was he talking about adults? NO, the subject of this chapter was little children.

Mat 18:2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus told his disciples they must be converted and become as little children to enter the kingdom of heaven. Was Jesus telling his disciples they must become wicked little sinners to enter heaven? Absurd.

Luk 15:29 And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:
30 But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.
31 And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

Here Jesus spoke of the elder brother who never sinned at any time against his father. Did Jesus forget the doctrine of Original Sin? :laugh:

Did the father rebuke the boy for his wild claim of perfection? NO, he confirmed it was true, he called him SON, and said THOU ART EVER WITH ME.
He also contrasted the elder son to his younger brother who was "dead" and "lost".

Boy, if Jesus was here today, all you folks would have to correct him and tell him that everyone is born a sinner, and there is no such thing as a person who has never sinned. :laugh:

 

[Yeshua1]

Having the capacity to do something, and doing it are two different things.

Is it possible for a baseball player to hit 1.000? Yes. Has any player with more than 50 at bats ever hit 1.000? NO.

Now, if a fellow only bats 3 times and gets 3 hits, he hit 1.000, but I doubt that even that has ever been done. But this would be comparable to a baby that died.

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; )

How many sins had Jacob and Esau committed in their mother's womb? ZERO.

Do babies ever die in their mother's womb? YES, millions if not billions since the history of the world.

This would explain the 99 just persons who never went astray, and need no repentance, and the elder son who never transgressed his father's commandment at any time.

Mat 18:12 How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?
13 And if so be that he find it, verily I say unto you, he rejoiceth more of that sheep, than of the ninety and nine which went not astray.
14 Even so it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish.

Here Jesus spoke of 99 sheep that never went astray. Was he talking about adults? NO, the subject of this chapter was little children.

Mat 18:2 And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them,
3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Jesus told his disciples they must be converted and become as little children to enter the kingdom of heaven. Was Jesus telling his disciples they must become wicked little sinners to enter heaven? Absurd.

Luk 15:29 And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends:
30 But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf.
31 And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine.
32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

Here Jesus spoke of the elder brother who never sinned at any time against his father. Did Jesus forget the doctrine of Original Sin? :laugh:

Did the father rebuke the boy for his wild claim of perfection? NO, he confirmed it was true, he called him SON, and said THOU ART EVER WITH ME.
He also contrasted the elder son to his younger brother who was "dead" and "lost".

Boy, if Jesus was here today, all you folks would have to correct him and tell him that everyone is born a sinner, and there is no such thing as a person who has never sinned. :laugh:

Do you hold that there were any under the old covenant that kept the law well enough to be blameless, and rightious before God though?

As any but jesus manage to pull that off ?

 

[Yeshua1]

Of course.

IF one denies Original Sin, isn't that where your theology takes you?

 

[DHK]

I do not deny he was speaking to believers, but he spoke to Jews in Rome as well;

As you have demonstrated in so many other posts you continue to demonstrate here that you are unable to deal with and understand figures of speech, literary devices, and in general an author's way of expressing himself. Go back to the theme of the book. Outline it. See what he is speaking about.
First, there is an introduction. There he tells who he is, and who he is writing to. He is Paul the apostle writing to the saints at Rome.

The first chapter describes the heathen of the world. But the saints at Rome are not the heathen of the world. They are not the ones engaged in homosexuality or idolatry. They are not the ones who:
Romans 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
--You say this is descriptive of the church of Rome. This is who he is writing to.

By the same logic you say that the church of Rome is composed all of Jews, simply because he uses a literary device of a hypothetical in writing to Jews (as if Jews were present). But he isn't. He is writing to the saints at Rome.
Romans 2:21 Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?
22 Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?
23 Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?
24 For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.
--This is not descriptive of the church of Rome. The saints of God do not do these things. This is what you are accusing Aquilla and Priscilla and all that are in their house of doing. That is ludicrous.
He is addressing the heathen Jews of the world. He is not addressing any Jew of the church at Rome for there were no Jews at Rome. To be a member of the Church one had to forsake the Jewish religion and become a believer in Christ.

The same goes for chapter 3. He was describing the Jews and Gentiles of the world. But the letter is always addressed to the saints at Rome. It was for their information. Their church is not composed of these heathen unbelievers. You say it is.
This is how you describe the saints in Jesus Christ:
Romans 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:
14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood:
16 Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17 And the way of peace have they not known:
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

Is this descriptive of the saints in Rome? That is your interpretation.

 

[Aaron]

IF one denies Original Sin, isn't that where your theology takes you?

Absolutely.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

There is no book in the Bible written to unbelievers.

I guess they all better hope they get evangelized, then, if the Bible isn't for them.

You realize the dichotomy of your stated view here vs. what you've said elsewhere about theology being necessary for salvation, right?

 

[quantumfaith]

I guess they all better hope they get evangelized, then, if the Bible isn't for them.

You realize the dichotomy of your stated view here vs. what you've said elsewhere about theology being necessary for salvation, right?

I love the Picard Facepalm. :applause::applause:

 

[DHK]

I guess they all better hope they get evangelized, then, if the Bible isn't for them.

You realize the dichotomy of your stated view here vs. what you've said elsewhere about theology being necessary for salvation, right?

Read carefully:
I didn't say the IS NOT for them.
I said the Bible IS NOT written TO them.
There is a big difference.
The entire Bible is written to believers. Show me otherwise.

Take the example of Philip and the eunuch.
The eunuch was reading the Book of Isaiah. How much did he understand?
Philip offered to join him. He asked him if he understood what he read.
The immediate answer of the eunuch was: "How can I understand unless some man show me?"
Then Philip began at the same place and preached unto him Jesus.
Philip could do that because Philip had the Spirit of God dwelling in him. The Holy Spirit was present then.

The natural man receives not the things of the Spirit of God for they are spiritually discerned (1Cor.2:14).

The Great Commission is given to believers is given to us to help them understand the gospel. God works through his word, and through believers who preach his word.

For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved, it is the power of God.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

The eunuch was reading the Book of Isaiah. How much did he understand?
Philip offered to join him. He asked him if he understood what he read.
The immediate answer of the eunuch was: "How can I understand unless some man show me?"

Which proves only that he was not aware that the Holy Spirit can supernaturally enable his understanding, though in this instance, God chose to use Philip to help him with his revelation.

Sorry, DHK, semantics and equivocation don't change the facts.

 

[Winman]

Jhn 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

My Bible says the book of John was written so people MIGHT believe. So this is written to unbelievers to enable them to believe.

 

[salzer mtn]

In Chapter seven of Romans in verse nine Paul said he was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came sin revived and he died. Paul as other lost people think they need not a savior and they are alive spiritually as anyone else because they think they keep commandments or live by the golden rule or boast in their good works. The commandments Paul were keeping in verse ten which he thought were ordained unto life he found out were unto death. When did Paul find this out? Going back to the latter part of verse nine, but when the commandment came sin revived and I died. When Christ appeared to him and convicted Paul he had broken all of Gods law and the law was never meant to save, the sin that Paul never thought he had revived, Paul was now alive to this fact. Paul admitted in verse eleven he had been deceived. Again he was deceived by thinking he was alive, when in reality in Gods eyes he was dead.

 

[Winman]

In Chapter seven of Romans in chapter nine Paul said he was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came sin revived and he died. Paul as other lost people think they need not a savior and they are alive spiritually as anyone else because they think they keep commandments or live by the golden rule or boast in their good works. The commandments Paul were keeping in verse ten which he thought were ordained unto life he found out were unto death. When did Paul find this out? Going back to the latter part of verse nine, but when the commandment came sin revived and I died. When Christ appeared to him and convicted Paul he had broken all of Gods law and the law was never meant to save, the sin that Paul never thought he had revived. Paul admitted in verse eleven he had been deceived. Again he was deceived by thinking he was alive, when really in Gods eyes he was dead.

Paul did not say he "thought" he was alive without the law once as you interpret. No, he clearly said he was alive without the law once, but when the commandment came, sin revived and he died. He didn't say he "thought" he died either.

Like so many others, your interpretation of scripture is that it really doesn't say what it says. When scriptures says God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance, your interpretation is that God really wants many to perish and not come to repentance.

According to many here, God is unable to say what he really means. He is not smart enough to express himself properly.

Thanks for the offer to explain this scripture, but no thanks.

 

[salzer mtn]

Paul did not say he "thought" he was alive without the law once as you interpret. No, he clearly said he was alive without the law once, but when the commandment came, sin revived and he died. He didn't say he "thought" he died either.

Like so many others, your interpretation of scripture is that it really doesn't say what it says. When scriptures says God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance, your interpretation is that God really wants many to perish and not come to repentance.

According to many here, God is unable to say what he really means. He is not smart enough to express himself properly.

Thanks for the offer to explain this scripture, but no thanks.

I guess Paul didn't think he was doing Gods service as a Pharisee by killing Christians either by your way of thinking. He plainly stated in verse eleven that sin taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me and by it slew me. And by the way you left out the part of scripture that say's The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; BUT IS LONG SUFFERING TO US-WARD (Christians) not willing that any perish but that all should come to repentance.

 

[DHK]

Which proves only that he was not aware that the Holy Spirit can supernaturally enable his understanding, though in this instance, God chose to use Philip to help him with his revelation.

Sorry, DHK, semantics and equivocation don't change the facts.

It is not semantics.
If you think you are so right, then I challenge you. Show me one book of the NT that was written to the unsaved. Quote the introduction word for word. It must be in the first chapter, the introduction of the book written to unbelievers. Prove your statements. Back them up with evidence.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

Show me one book of the NT that was written to the unsaved.

John 1, NASB
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
---
John 20
30 Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book;
31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. [Emphasis added]​

 

[DHK]

John 1, NASB
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.
4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.
5 The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
---
John 20
30 Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book;
31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name. [Emphasis added]​

The book was written to Christians. If it wasn't written to Christians we would not have this book today. We have it because Christians took the book as inspired Scripture written to them and preserved the MSS as the preserved Word of God.

The unsaved Jews hated the life of Christ. That is what the gospel of John is--a history of the life of Christ. It is not one of the synoptics for John adds additional information that the others did not write about. He had the other gospels, and knew what they wrote. Matthew, for example, wrote as early as 50 A.D., but John wrote between 90-98 A.D., well after the other gospels, giving information that was supplemental to the others.
The Jews hated Christ; they crucified him. They rejected both him and the kingdom. Why would they want such a book?

When Paul came to Greece the Greeks entertained him as he gave the story of the gospel. They were there to hear any "new" thing. They said "What has this babbler got to say?"
But when he began to speak of the resurrection they got angry and turned away from immediately. They dismissed him. They didn't want to hear any more. They didn't have any need for story of the resurrected Christ. The Greeks didn't want to hear about the gospel. It was "foolishness unto them, and a stumbling block to the Jews."

The only people interested in this wonderful message and in the preservation of this book were the Christians. The plea at the end of the book is the same plea that every pastor gives at the end of his message whether or not unsaved are there. There is nothing unusual about it. It is the conclusion of his book--a very natural conclusion. It is no proof that it is written to unbelievers. Throughout the book Christ tells how one is to come to Christ. That doesn't mean it is written to the unsaved. It is needful information for the believer. What Scriptures do you use when talking to someone about Christ?
John 3:16 perhaps?