Is Original Sin Doctrine Found in Bible?

[Iconoclast]

Jon c...
.all sinned..at one point in time...is what is taught...I will post it when iget to a keyboard

 

[JonC]

There is a balance of grammar, syntax and context of Koine Greek for a proper hermeneutic.
There is also the very important element of word nuance.

Admittedly I come short of the ability of many.
But Romans 5:12 - Yes, I am convinced of my view because of the grammar primarily.

While I disagree I also admit that my knowledge of Greek is inferior to others. I studied the language at a graduate level but for only a year (I would never suggest taking my word for it when it comes to any language...to include English ). So I also rely on the scholarship of others.

Although I think we will disagree on the doctrine itself, perhaps @TCassidy or @John of Japan could weigh in on whether or not they view the Greek as demanding that interpretation.

 

[JonShaff]

While I disagree I also admit that my knowledge of Greek is inferior to others. I studied the language at a graduate level but for only a year (I would never suggest taking my word for it when it comes to any language...to include English ). So I also rely on the scholarship of others.

Although I think we will disagree on the doctrine itself, perhaps @TCassidy or @John of Japan could weigh in on whether or not they view the Greek as demanding that interpretation.

"Sinned" in Romans 3:23 is... Aorist, Active, Indicative...

From Course II, Lesson 2 :

What about kind of action? Mark it down, as its name suggests, the kind of action indicated by the aorist tense is undefined. Inasmuch as there is no definition of the kind of action, the emphasis is upon the fact of the action rather than the duration of the action. In the indicative mood, the significance is that it happened. Whether it happened over a period of time or in an instant is not indicated.

 

[JonC]

"Sinned" in Romans 3:23 is... Aorist, Active, Indicative...

From Course II, Lesson 2 :

What about kind of action? Mark it down, as its name suggests, the kind of action indicated by the aorist tense is undefined. Inasmuch as there is no definition of the kind of action, the emphasis is upon the fact of the action rather than the duration of the action. In the indicative mood, the significance is that it happened. Whether it happened over a period of time or in an instant is not indicated.

Thank you. I completely agree.

 

[Darrell C]

Paul makes the argument that sin and death are inextricably linked in Romans 5

[12] Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—[13] for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. [14] Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. (Romans 5:12–14 ESV)

I agree. However, we have to deal with the issue of babes in the womb that die, for example. They have not themselves sinned, that is an impossibility, and Paul's point is that all die because all sin.

The babe in the womb that dies shares one thing in common with all men who enter the world, and that is they are conceived and born separated from God. And that is the condition Christ remedied, for the Old Testament Saints (who died apart from the Atonement and Eternal Redemption), and for the New Covenant Saint, who unlike the Old Testament Saint is reconciled to God immediately at Salvation.

The translation you use makes it pretty clear that death spread to all men, not sin. We could view that separation as the sin inherited, because it is a state that is passed down. But, we cannot equate that to sin when sin must first be committed for one to be guilty. That was the case for Adam, right?

His over-arching point here is that even though there was no Law between Adam and Moses--and, therefore, no sins being counted--death still occurred.

Correct, because they personally sinned.

His argument is, then, that Adam's sin is counted as our sin (or passed on to us)

And that is the focus of the discussion: where do we see that?

We see death as the inevitable consequence for all men, but again, what sin would we charge to the infant in the womb?

His argument is, then, that Adam's sin is counted as our sin (or passed on to us) and the evidence is that all between Adam and Moses (except one) die.

They died because they could not refrain from sinning.

Now contrast that with the promise of the New Birth:


Ezekiel 36:24-27
King James Version (KJV)

24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.


It is necessary for natural man to have God's intervention in the removal of sin, who even when born again, remains in fallen flesh.

Man's nature is bent towards sin, the new creature has the guidance of GOd in identifying sin and removing it from their daily conversation.

How can death happen when sin isn't counted and the wages of sin is death? Because Adam's descendants die because of Adam's sin.

That is a great question, and I would suggest to you that the answer lies in the fact that all men are conceived, and born...dead:


John 6:49-53
King James Version (KJV)

49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.


When Christ states "I am the Living Bread," and says men must eat of that Bread, and clarifies that the Bread is His flesh, what He is saying is men must believe on His Sacrifice of Himself.

That is how a man "eats of His Flesh."

And what He is saying here is that if a man does not eat of this Bread...he has no life in Him.

And one of the most basic principles of the Incarnation is that Christ came to bestow everlasting life to mankind, the implication being...He was not doing so prior to His Coming. This is a worthy study, and if you look into it you will see that all from Adam to Moses, and all under the Law...did not receive everlasting life. If they had, then we would have two sources for Eternal Life, and we know that is not the case.

So let's look at your question again:

How can death happen when sin isn't counted and the wages of sin is death? Because Adam's descendants die because of Adam's sin.

Personal sin is a cause for physical death, there is no question, That is what happened to Adam. He went from close communion with God, and having access to the tree of Life, to being thrust out of the Garden where he no longer had that, and died. His descendants are born separated from God, and...

...dead.

That's Paul's argument here. Others have coined the term "Original sin," but whatever you call it, Paul generates the concept here.

He does distinguish the cause for man's condition, but, the death that Christ remedies is spiritual, not physical.

In relation to man, Adam did commit the Original Sin, and he is the reason why we are all born without the life of God.

What is more, if we reject the argument about the "Federal Headship" of Adam and his sin (guilt and propensity) being passed on to us, then we must also abandon the concept of the Federal Headship of Christ and His righteousness being counted as ours, too.

Not so. I do not need to view Adam's sin as my own, hence the reason why I (or any man would be judged) an under condemnation. We are shown the distinction right in the very text:


Romans 5:14
King James Version (KJV)

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.


In view is the sin of the individual, not an inherited sin from Adam.

So, this doctrine of Paul's is abandoned with great consequences and at great peril.

It's not Paul's doctrine, it is the doctrines of men.

Which do not, in my view, even scratch the surface of the relevant elements of mankind's condition. Its easy to say "You inherited sin from Adam," but, again I ask...

...where do we see that in Scripture?

The Archangel

PS. I didnt' read the entire thread.

Not necessary, lol, great post anyway. Just need to stir up the conversation and the best way to come to conclusions is usually by addressing the objections raised to positions held.

As it is said, "Remove everything that is not possible and that which is possible remains." Or something along those lines, lol.


God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

... So a aborted babe can be saved without being a human?

First, an aborted baby is human, that is just basic science, my friend.

Secondly, yes, an aborted baby can be saved, because they receive of the same grace the Old Testament Saints received, who also died not...

1....having received the Atonement;
2...not having been born again;
3...not having been reconciled to God;
4...never having professed faith in the Risen Savior;

Why would God forbear eternal judgment on the Old Testament Saint and not do so for a babe in the womb who dies before ever gaining the ability to sin?

What is he then when saved , in your opinion

He, or she...belong to God.

When we are conceived we receive a spirit. The spirit of a man is not necessarily identical with the flesh that houses the spirit. When we are raised from the dead it is doubtful that we will be the Age, or identical in appearance to that which we were when we die physically.

Numerous people did not identify Jesus Christ after He was raised in glorified form, and the infant or young child that dies will be no less a spirit than you and I.


God bless.

 

[JonShaff]

... So a aborted babe can be saved without being a human?

What is he then when saved , in your opinion

You do realize that the difference between a baby that is not born yet vs. a baby that is born is simply his/her location, right?

 

[Iconoclast]

"JonC,

Hey Iconoclast. I hope all is well (I haven't conversed with you in awhile).

Hello JonC
Have been driving alot...things are okay...have had some nice gospel opportunities...I have been reading more than posting lately.
I had the opportunity to meet with a Pastor who has written a few books, and another that lives about 15 miles away.....reading both their books as well as my usual ride along books...lol

I am going to make a statement that applies to many here, and I hope you don't take it as a attack against you or as applying only to this post. I also hope that it is helpful, as is my intent.

JonC....I have sort of observed your M.O. in how you post....so I relax and look at what you offer....

The short answer is "no, the grammar of 3:23 does not teach the Doctrine of Original Sin".

Lets look at that....Here is an excerpt from Calvinism/Arminianism...by W.R.Downing

This passage describes the horrible ethical, intellectual, spiritual, moral and social history of mankind abandoned by God to its own sinful tendencies and passions.
This has great epistemological implications Kai. kaqw.j ouvk evdoki,masan to.n qeo.n e;cein evn evpignw,sei( pare,dwken auvtou.j o` qeo.j eivj avdo,kimon nou/n, The terms (evdoki,masan... avdo,kimon) connote “disapproved” [after testing, rejected] or “reprobated” [Latin]. “being filled” is to be construed with each of the following: “all [kinds or forms of] unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness...” “Full of” is to be construed with each of the following: [being filled to the point of overflowing or bursting with] “envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity...” oi{tine" toV dikaivwma tou' qeou' ejpignovnte". They are such ones who [rel. pron., stressing character] as the judgment of God [emph. pos.] fully comprehending...” evpignw,sij denotes full or adequate knowledge. They are fully aware of Divine judgment upon their actions. 395 pa,ntej ga.r h[marton kai. u`sterou/ntai th/j do,xhj tou/ qeou/, “For all sinned [aor., sinned in Adam], and are continually coming short [pres., denoting continuous action] of the glory of God.” 396 “...all have sinned.” (pa,ntej h[marton). The aor. tense signifies an event, “all sinned [in Adam].” This refers to original sin, not subsequent or personal sins. 397 (u`phkou,sate de. evk kardi,aj eivj o]n paredo,qhte tu,pon didach/j) Lit: “...[that] to which you were handed over [emph. pos.] pattern of teaching...” Believers have been pressed—reshaped, conformed to, molded—into the Gospel pattern by the grace of God. They have become “willing bondslaves to righteousness.” 398 Unbelievers have never been free from the claims of righteousness. The idea is rather one of “disengaged.” Righteousness had no power to engage them, i.e., to motivate or empower them. 399 to. fro,nhma th/j sarko.j, emph. the content or process of thought. e;cqra eivj [enmity, hatred] qeo,n( tw/| ga.r no,mw| tou/ qeou/ ouvc u`pota,ssetai( ouvde. ga.r du,natai.\The unregenerate mind has a hatred for God and does not possess the dynamic or power (ouvde….du,natai) to submit to Divine truth. 143
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. (1 Cor. 2:14)400
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved.) (Eph. 2:1–5)401
This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. (Eph. 4:17–19)402
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses. (Col. 2:13)
400 yuciko.j de. a;nqrwpoj [man at the apex of his powers. Used of the great philosophers] ouv de,cetai [does not intelligently welcome with the hand, cf. “dexterous”] ta. tou/ pneu,matoj tou/ qeou/\ mwri,a ga.r [foolish (emph. pos.), hence, tasteless, insipid, cf. “moron,” “morose,” mentally deficient] auvtw/| evstin kai. ouv du,natai [not able, having no dynamic] gnw/nai( o[ti pneumatikw/j avnakri,netaiÅ There must be spiritual life before there can be spiritual perception. 401 The word “dead” is not a verb, but a noun following a pres. ptc. (o;ntaj nekrou.j) giving the connotation of a continued or unchanging state. The term used in these verses is “corpse” (nekro,j), i.e., wholly and totally unresponsive to spiritual life and realities. The use of the noun rather than the verb for “dead” makes the expression much stronger. The parenthetical expression at the end of this passage emphasizes that salvation by grace is nothing less than the impartation of spiritual life. 402 evn mataio,thti tou/ noo.j auvtw/n Lit: “in the futility of their thinking evskotwme,noi th/| dianoi,a| o;ntej. The ptc. is placed last, making the terms “darkened” and “the understanding” emphatic by pos. The term “understanding” (dia,noia) denotes the faculty of knowing, understanding or moral reflection. The entire statement (Eph. 4:17–19) demonstrates both the epistemological futility of unregenerate man and the resulting moral judgment of God upon such ignorance. th.n a;gnoian th.n ou=san evn auvtoi/j( dia. th.n pw,rwsin th/j kardi,aj auvtw/n. The term “ignorance” (th.n a;gnoian) denotes want of knowledge or perception. The reason given here is “the blindness of their own hearts”—a willful, culpable blindness. Man does not know God; man does not want to know God. 144




THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE FALL
The consequences of the fall or apostasy of man from God were and are inclusive—spiritual, moral ethical and physical. No part of man’s nature has escaped. His intellect, affections and will have been perverted by and brought under the reigning power of sin. Five issues are relevant to the subject of depravity: the consequences of Adam’s sin, the reality of spiritual death, the reigning power of sin, the noetic effects of sin, and the reality of Satanic blindness.
407 The irresponsibility of Adam is evident. He blamed both God and the woman rather than himself. But God held him responsible as the responsible head of the marriage relationship. “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world...” 149
THE IMPUTATION OF ADAM’S SIN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
Adam did not merely sin as an individual, but as the federal head and representative of the human race.408 Thus, the sin of Adam—original sin—was imputed to all his posterity. Even if a person could begin from any point in his or her life and live perfectly without sin—even if this were possible—he or she would still be utterly condemned because of original sin and the inescapable inheritance of a corrupted or sinful nature. The condemnation, guilt, polluting reality and power of sin are thus inescapable. Sin permeated the entire human race and immediately began to exercise its deceptive, controlling and perverting influence upon and within the human personality. Every human being is thus a sinner from conception—a sinner by imputation [original sin or the imputation of Adam’s sin], a sinner by nature [the inherited sinful nature of fallen Adam], and a sinner by choice and practice [the reality and expression of personal sin] (Rom. 5:12; Gen. 5:3; Psa. 51:5; Psa. 58:3; Eccl. 7:20; Rom. 1:18–32; Rom. 3:9–18).

 

[Iconoclast]

ibid;
Nothing short of a “spiritual birth,” or the total renewal of the inner being, is necessary for any human being to see spiritual realities or enter into them. Man by nature is saddled with an insurmountable inability apart from regenerating grace.

zhtei/n to.n qeo,n( eiv a;ra ge yhlafh,seian auvto.n kai. eu[roien( kai, ge ouv makra.n avpo. e`no.j e`ka,stou h`mw/n u`pa,rcontaÅ evn auvtw/| ga.r zw/men kai. kinou,meqa kai. evsme,n... The witness of God in history and providence, especially as seen in the rise and fall of succeeding civilizations should be clearly noted by anyone acquainted with history and cause that person to seek out God. The unregenerate person, if moved to search out the God of history at all, is pictured as blindly groping for the reality of the God of history and providence—although the God of history is omnipresent, imminent and the sustainer of all persons and things! “Feel after” (yhlafh,seian), to grope, from ya,w, to touch, to run the fingers over a surface.

Although God is imminent in creation, history and providence, the unregenerate mind can only blindly grope after him. Such are the noetic effects of sin upon the unregenerate thought–process.

VApokalu,ptetai ga.r ovrgh. qeou/ avpV ouvranou/ (perf., emph. pos.), “stands revealed” much stronger than the simple pres. tense. “Hold” (katecovntwn), pres. ptc., “...are constantly or habitually holding down [suppressing]...” Unregenerate individuals constantly seek to suppress the truth by their sinfulness.


“Without excuse,” (avnapologh,touj), without a defense, or apologetic. The witness of the created universe is so great as to leave men without a defense before God as to their accountability to perceive his eternal power and Godhead. ...gno,ntej to.n qeo.n ouvc w`j qeo.n evdo,xasan... “...having known God, not as God [emph. pos.] did they glorify Him...” This has great epistemological implications. Not to glorify God as he is marks a departure from truth and is the first step in apostasy.


avllV evmataiw,qhsan evn toi/j dialogismoi/j auvtw/n... Lit: “became futile in their reasonings...” When man turned from God, he turned from all possibility of knowing reality and truth. He became epistemologically bankrupt.

kai. evskoti,sqh h` avsu,netoj auvtw/n kardi,aÅ “...darkened became their incapacitated heart...” avsu,netoj denotes the inability to put things together (from su,n, together with, and I]hmi, to put or place). In the fall, man lost the ability to grasp reality and truth inclusively, and became both fragmented and darkened [disoriented] in his thinking fa,skontej ei=nai sofoi. evmwra,nqhsan... “In the very process of professing themselves [pres. ptc.] to be wise, they became fools [aor.].” The term “fools” connotes the idea of insipid, mentally deficient.

inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 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. (Rom. 1:18–32)394
For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. (Rom. 3:23)395
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. (Rom. 5:12)396
But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness. (Rom. 6:17–18)397
For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. (Rom. 6:20)398
Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. (Rom. 8:7–8)

This passage describes the horrible ethical, intellectual, spiritual, moral and social history of mankind abandoned by God to its own sinful tendencies and passions. This has great epistemological implications Kai. kaqw.j ouvk evdoki,masan to.n qeo.n e;cein evn evpignw,sei( pare,dwken auvtou.j o` qeo.j eivj avdo,kimon nou/n, The terms (evdoki,masan... avdo,kimon) connote “disapproved” [after testing, rejected] or “reprobated” [Latin]. “being filled” is to be construed with each of the following: “all [kinds or forms of] unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness...” “Full of” is to be construed with each of the following: [being filled to the point of overflowing or bursting with] “envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity...” oi{tine" toV dikaivwma tou' qeou' ejpignovnte". They are such ones who [rel. pron., stressing character] as the judgment of God [emph. pos.] fully comprehending...” evpignw,sij denotes full or adequate knowledge. They are fully aware of Divine judgment upon their actions. 395 pa,ntej ga.r h[marton kai. u`sterou/ntai th/j do,xhj tou/ qeou/, “For all sinned [aor., sinned in Adam], and are continually coming short [pres., denoting continuous action] of the glory of God.” 396 “...all have sinned.” (pa,ntej h[marton). The aor. tense signifies an event, “all sinned [in Adam].” This refers to original sin, not subsequent or personal sins. 397 (u`phkou,sate de. evk kardi,aj eivj o]n paredo,qhte tu,pon didach/j) Lit: “...[that] to which you were handed over [emph. pos.] pattern of teaching...” Believers have been pressed—reshaped, conformed to, molded—into the Gospel pattern by the grace of God. They have become “willing bondslaves to righteousness.”

Unbelievers have never been free from the claims of righteousness. The idea is rather one of “disengaged.” Righteousness had no power to engage them, i.e., to motivate or empower them. 399 to. fro,nhma th/j sarko.j, emph. the content or process of thought. e;cqra eivj [enmity, hatred] qeo,n( tw/| ga.r no,mw| tou/ qeou/ ouvc u`pota,ssetai( ouvde. ga.r du,natai.\The unregenerate mind has a hatred for God and does not possess the dynamic or power (ouvde….du,natai) to submit to Divine truth. 143
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. (1 Cor. 2:14)400
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved.) (Eph. 2:1–5)401
This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. (Eph. 4:17–19)402
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses. (Col. 2:13)
400 yuciko.j de. a;nqrwpoj [man at the apex of his powers. Used of the great philosophers] ouv de,cetai [does not intelligently welcome with the hand, cf. “dexterous”] ta. tou/ pneu,matoj tou/ qeou/\ mwri,a ga.r [foolish (emph. pos.), hence, tasteless, insipid, cf. “moron,” “morose,” mentally deficient] auvtw/| evstin kai. ouv du,natai [not able, having no dynamic] gnw/nai( o[ti pneumatikw/j avnakri,netaiÅ There must be spiritual life before there can be spiritual perception. 401 The word “dead” is not a verb, but a noun following a pres. ptc. (o;ntaj nekrou.j) giving the connotation of a continued or unchanging state. The term used in these verses is “corpse” (nekro,j), i.e., wholly and totally unresponsive to spiritual life and realities. The use of the noun rather than the verb for “dead” makes the expression much stronger. The parenthetical expression at the end of this passage emphasizes that salvation by grace is nothing less than the impartation of spiritual life. 402 evn mataio,thti tou/ noo.j auvtw/n Lit: “in the futility of their thinking evskotwme,noi th/| dianoi,a| o;ntej. The ptc. is placed last, making the terms “darkened” and “the understanding” emphatic by pos. The term “understanding” (dia,noia) denotes the faculty of knowing, understanding or moral reflection. The entire statement (Eph. 4:17–19) demonstrates both the epistemological futility of unregenerate man and the resulting moral judgment of God upon such ignorance. th.n a;gnoian th.n ou=san evn auvtoi/j( dia. th.n pw,rwsin th/j kardi,aj auvtw/n. The term “ignorance” (th.n a;gnoian) denotes want of knowledge or perception. The reason given here is “the blindness of their own hearts”—a willful, culpable blindness. Man does not know God; man does not want to know God. 144

 

[JonC]

"JonC,


Hello JonC
Have been driving alot...things are okay...have had some nice gospel opportunities...I have been reading more than posting lately.
I had the opportunity to meet with a Pastor who has written a few books, and another that lives about 15 miles away.....reading both their books as well as my usual ride along books...lol



JonC....I have sort of observed your M.O. in how you post....so I relax and look at what you offer....



Lets look at that....Here is an excerpt from Calvinism/Arminianism...by W.R.Downing

This passage describes the horrible ethical, intellectual, spiritual, moral and social history of mankind abandoned by God to its own sinful tendencies and passions.
This has great epistemological implications Kai. kaqw.j ouvk evdoki,masan to.n qeo.n e;cein evn evpignw,sei( pare,dwken auvtou.j o` qeo.j eivj avdo,kimon nou/n, The terms (evdoki,masan... avdo,kimon) connote “disapproved” [after testing, rejected] or “reprobated” [Latin]. “being filled” is to be construed with each of the following: “all [kinds or forms of] unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness...” “Full of” is to be construed with each of the following: [being filled to the point of overflowing or bursting with] “envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity...” oi{tine" toV dikaivwma tou' qeou' ejpignovnte". They are such ones who [rel. pron., stressing character] as the judgment of God [emph. pos.] fully comprehending...” evpignw,sij denotes full or adequate knowledge. They are fully aware of Divine judgment upon their actions. 395 pa,ntej ga.r h[marton kai. u`sterou/ntai th/j do,xhj tou/ qeou/, “For all sinned [aor., sinned in Adam], and are continually coming short [pres., denoting continuous action] of the glory of God.” 396 “...all have sinned.” (pa,ntej h[marton). The aor. tense signifies an event, “all sinned [in Adam].” This refers to original sin, not subsequent or personal sins. 397 (u`phkou,sate de. evk kardi,aj eivj o]n paredo,qhte tu,pon didach/j) Lit: “...[that] to which you were handed over [emph. pos.] pattern of teaching...” Believers have been pressed—reshaped, conformed to, molded—into the Gospel pattern by the grace of God. They have become “willing bondslaves to righteousness.” 398 Unbelievers have never been free from the claims of righteousness. The idea is rather one of “disengaged.” Righteousness had no power to engage them, i.e., to motivate or empower them. 399 to. fro,nhma th/j sarko.j, emph. the content or process of thought. e;cqra eivj [enmity, hatred] qeo,n( tw/| ga.r no,mw| tou/ qeou/ ouvc u`pota,ssetai( ouvde. ga.r du,natai.\The unregenerate mind has a hatred for God and does not possess the dynamic or power (ouvde….du,natai) to submit to Divine truth. 143
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. (1 Cor. 2:14)400
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved.) (Eph. 2:1–5)401
This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart: who being past feeling have given themselves over unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. (Eph. 4:17–19)402
And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses. (Col. 2:13)
400 yuciko.j de. a;nqrwpoj [man at the apex of his powers. Used of the great philosophers] ouv de,cetai [does not intelligently welcome with the hand, cf. “dexterous”] ta. tou/ pneu,matoj tou/ qeou/\ mwri,a ga.r [foolish (emph. pos.), hence, tasteless, insipid, cf. “moron,” “morose,” mentally deficient] auvtw/| evstin kai. ouv du,natai [not able, having no dynamic] gnw/nai( o[ti pneumatikw/j avnakri,netaiÅ There must be spiritual life before there can be spiritual perception. 401 The word “dead” is not a verb, but a noun following a pres. ptc. (o;ntaj nekrou.j) giving the connotation of a continued or unchanging state. The term used in these verses is “corpse” (nekro,j), i.e., wholly and totally unresponsive to spiritual life and realities. The use of the noun rather than the verb for “dead” makes the expression much stronger. The parenthetical expression at the end of this passage emphasizes that salvation by grace is nothing less than the impartation of spiritual life. 402 evn mataio,thti tou/ noo.j auvtw/n Lit: “in the futility of their thinking evskotwme,noi th/| dianoi,a| o;ntej. The ptc. is placed last, making the terms “darkened” and “the understanding” emphatic by pos. The term “understanding” (dia,noia) denotes the faculty of knowing, understanding or moral reflection. The entire statement (Eph. 4:17–19) demonstrates both the epistemological futility of unregenerate man and the resulting moral judgment of God upon such ignorance. th.n a;gnoian th.n ou=san evn auvtoi/j( dia. th.n pw,rwsin th/j kardi,aj auvtw/n. The term “ignorance” (th.n a;gnoian) denotes want of knowledge or perception. The reason given here is “the blindness of their own hearts”—a willful, culpable blindness. Man does not know God; man does not want to know God. 144




THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE FALL
The consequences of the fall or apostasy of man from God were and are inclusive—spiritual, moral ethical and physical. No part of man’s nature has escaped. His intellect, affections and will have been perverted by and brought under the reigning power of sin. Five issues are relevant to the subject of depravity: the consequences of Adam’s sin, the reality of spiritual death, the reigning power of sin, the noetic effects of sin, and the reality of Satanic blindness.
407 The irresponsibility of Adam is evident. He blamed both God and the woman rather than himself. But God held him responsible as the responsible head of the marriage relationship. “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world...” 149
THE IMPUTATION OF ADAM’S SIN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
Adam did not merely sin as an individual, but as the federal head and representative of the human race.408 Thus, the sin of Adam—original sin—was imputed to all his posterity. Even if a person could begin from any point in his or her life and live perfectly without sin—even if this were possible—he or she would still be utterly condemned because of original sin and the inescapable inheritance of a corrupted or sinful nature. The condemnation, guilt, polluting reality and power of sin are thus inescapable. Sin permeated the entire human race and immediately began to exercise its deceptive, controlling and perverting influence upon and within the human personality. Every human being is thus a sinner from conception—a sinner by imputation [original sin or the imputation of Adam’s sin], a sinner by nature [the inherited sinful nature of fallen Adam], and a sinner by choice and practice [the reality and expression of personal sin] (Rom. 5:12; Gen. 5:3; Psa. 51:5; Psa. 58:3; Eccl. 7:20; Rom. 1:18–32; Rom. 3:9–18).

Good to hear you are well. Are you running the same route?

Reading your response I think that it would be impossible to engage our differences in a practical manner. The reason is we agree that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Where we disagree is in terms of imputed sin, but the end result is the same (except perhaps in regards to the death of a child).

Here is an illustration (flaws and all) about how I view the headship of Adam: Suppose I find an excellent tomato. I like it so much that I save a few of its seeds and plant them the next year. Now I have a bunch of tomato's that have exactly the same characteristic as the first.

We know that Adam's nature did not change in order for him to sin ("the fall" is a result of his sin or at least it is his sin, but his nature did not change into a "sin nature" in order for him to sin). He is our representative (our natural representative). Paul teaches us that death spread to all man not because of Adam's sin (although this is when death entered the world) but because all men sin. This sinfulness (as @JonShaff pointed out) is not past tense but a sense of continuance and establishes the principle of the flesh. More importantly, however, is the fact that Scripture itself only deals two natures - "flesh" and "spirit".

 

[HankD]

Although I think we will disagree on the doctrine itself, perhaps @TCassidy or @John of Japan could weigh in on whether or not they view the Greek as demanding that interpretation.

It might affect my thinking.

At this point with the simplicity (as compared to some of Paul's statements) of the Romans 5:12 sentence - probably not.

They (TC,JoJ) are holding back for a reason and I too would be interested in their view(s).

 

[HankD]

I think the biggest problem with the traditional view of what is called "original sin" is - what does God do with babies/children who die who have not come to the age of accountability? Eternal life or eternal damnation.

The answer I gave is that He regenerates them.

This should not bother C folks believing as they do that the elect are regenerated before they believe.

John the Baptist - regenerated in the womb?

 

[Iconoclast]

Good to hear you are well. Are you running the same route?

Reading your response I think that it would be impossible to engage our differences in a practical manner. The reason is we agree that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Where we disagree is in terms of imputed sin, but the end result is the same (except perhaps in regards to the death of a child).

Here is an illustration (flaws and all) about how I view the headship of Adam: Suppose I find an excellent tomato. I like it so much that I save a few of its seeds and plant them the next year. Now I have a bunch of tomato's that have exactly the same characteristic as the first.

We know that Adam's nature did not change in order for him to sin ("the fall" is a result of his sin or at least it is his sin, but his nature did not change into a "sin nature" in order for him to sin). He is our representative (our natural representative). Paul teaches us that death spread to all man not because of Adam's sin (although this is when death entered the world) but because all men sin. This sinfulness (as @JonShaff pointed out) is not past tense but a sense of continuance and establishes the principle of the flesh. More importantly, however, is the fact that Scripture itself only deals two natures - "flesh" and "spirit".

short answer is...it is both....we sinned in Adam.....we also sin by our own experience..
also Gen 1:31...Adam pre fall....was nevertheless.....untested....they speak of this as original righteousness....
As representative head....he failed...

To help me understand....I look to the Last Adam....His incarnation, His Active and Passive obedience were unique...He never fails.

JONC.....I just offered some lengthy portions containing information....I know you will take time to investigate....been running all around lately,Mich, tn, al ga fla.....in pa heading in to ny now

 

[Iconoclast]

I think the biggest problem with the traditional view of what is called "original sin" is - what does God do with babies/children who die who have not come to the age of accountability? Eternal life or eternal damnation.

The answer I gave is that He regenerates them.

This should not bother C folks believing as they do that the elect are regenerated before they believe.

John the Baptist - regenerated in the womb?

3._____ Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )

This statement leaves it all in the hands of God....

 

[Yeshua1]

Which verse are you speaking of???? Have you not read that after "the fall" God made them clothes. Not only that, but He involved Himself in their affirms (accepted Able's sacrifice, marked Cain, blessed them with children, saved Noah, chose Abrahm).

The problem, again, is that you seem to prefer philosophy over Scripture. Do you think, perhaps, that this is why God warns against such philosophies?

Jesus was and is Human, but his Humanity was and is of a perfect nature, as Adam once held before the fall...
So after the Fall, we still have the same sinless state nature Adam had before it?

 

[Yeshua1]

So you are again back to claiming Jesus had a "human nature" but not the same kind of "human nature" we have. Your suggestion Jesus was human without sharing in our humanity is an old heresy in disguise.

The scriptures teach that Jesus was and is fully human, but without a sin nature as we all had after the Fall!

 

[Yeshua1]

I believe you have missed the fact that I am pointing out.

According to the Greek grammar we (all) were there with Adam when he sinned and therefore we come into the world sinners and condemned already.

And that is why Jesus HAD to come via the Virgin Birth, in order to avoid having our fallen nature!

 

[Yeshua1]

I would like to go back to the OP: Is the doctrine or original sin found in the Bible or was this man-made doctrine of Augustine?

Perhaps we can clarify our terms. The doctrine of Original Sin is not the creation of Augustine, though he was the first to explicate it in the terms that it has come down to us in the West. The Bible is full of references to the Fall and its continuing malevolent effects.

Jon wants us to believe that it's a baleful influence of neoplatonism, an attempt to impose a philosophical structure upon scripture. No one familiar with Augustine would deny the influence of neoplatonism on his thought, but it's also easy to overstate it. His formulation of Original Sin could well be posited without any reference to neoplatonism. (Thus also on his writings on the Incarnation and Redemption, which he admits is at odds with neoplatonism; indeed, according to Aristotle it is the chief weakness of neoplatonism to require emanations and demiurges and daemons when the concept of a Mediator can solve all those supposed philosophical problems).

If you read Aristotle, he is trying to reconcile the mass of Scripture on this point into a coherent account of why we are so lost. If he is hamstrung in his conclusions, it is not because he is attempting to reconcile human brokenness with neoplatonism but that he is trying to reconcile the Fall with the dogmas of the Catholic Church.

The early churchmen all agreed that the Fall resulted in cataclysmic results. They agreed on the concept of ancestral sin: Somehow, Adam's sin was passed on to all of humankind. Augustine's version differed from the Orthodox conception in that he believed that not only are all humans born in a fallen state, subject to win, but they also share in the guilt of Adam for the first sin.

Augustine's understanding has waned and ebbed through the centuries. A strict adherence to his doctrine means, of course, that stillborn babies and infants who die without baptism are consigned to hell because they share the guilt of Adam. In this context, the medieval concept of Limbo was not cruelty by the Scholastics but rather a softening of Augustine's doctrine. The return to Augustine's doctrine in the Reformation era was an attempt by the Catholic Church to assert that it alone, and its sacraments, could rescue even babies from hell. Today Augustine's doctrine on this point is pretty much ignored; many in the Latin Rite church today would even subscribe to granting the beatific vision to all infants, baptized or not.

Again, it was not neoplatonism that urged him toward his concept of Original Sin, but his desire to uphold the authority of the Catholic Church and its sacraments.

However we wnt to language this truth.... the scriptures teach to us that something happened to the very state/nature of Adam after he fell into sinning, and that bad thing was passed on to every human afterward, save for Jesus Himself. We are all fallen in nature, if Jesus was same as us in regards to that, then He was fallen too!

 

[Yeshua1]

short answer is...it is both....we sinned in Adam.....we also sin by our own experience..
also Gen 1:31...Adam pre fall....was nevertheless.....untested....they speak of this as original righteousness....
As representative head....he failed...

To help me understand....I look to the Last Adam....His incarnation, His Active and Passive obedience were unique...He never fails.

JONC.....I just offered some lengthy portions containing information....I know you will take time to investigate....been running all around lately,Mich, tn, al ga fla.....in pa heading in to ny now

JonC seems to be holding to the fall not changing/affecting our natures, as he seems to be seeing jesus and us having exact same natures, but very much doubt Jesus was a fallen state as we now are!

 

[JonC]

Jesus was and is Human, but his Humanity was and is of a perfect nature, as Adam once held before the fall...
So after the Fall, we still have the same sinless state nature Adam had before it?

But you are basing this only on your theories. There exist no Scripture saying Adam's nature changed or that Adam and Christ shared one nature which was different from our own. In fact, when Paul speaks of Jesus as sharing in our humanity he doesn't point to Adam. The author of Hebrews even goes so far as to equate Jesus' humanity with the type common among men.

Adam sinned in his original nature. Jesus did not. Yet somehow you claim that Jesus and Adam had a human nature that was different from what we have as a human nature. This is nothing but the resurrection of an old heresy. You are using acceptable phrases ("Jesus was human") while denying His humanity ("He wasn't human like us, just like Adam except where Adam sinned in his original nature Jesus didn't").