Is the Doctrine of Original Sin Biblical?

[JesusFan]

Per Theopedia, this is the standard definition of that term
"Original sin is the doctrine which holds that human nature has been morally and ethically corrupted due to the disobedience of mankind's first parents to the revealed will of God. In the Bible, the first human transgression of God's command is described as the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden resulting in what theology calls the Fall of mankind. The doctrine of original sin holds that every person born into the world is tainted by the Fall such that all of humanity is ethically debilitated, and people are powerless to rehabilitate themselves, unless rescued by God."

Would you support his as a true biblical concept?

 

[Van]

The false and unbiblical claim that as a consequence of the Fall, the lost have no ability to seek God or understand spiritual milk is false.
Some claim to be spiritually dead is to be unable to seek God at all times, but this is just redefining the word dead to fit their bogus doctrine.

Luke 13:24 days many of the lost will seek the narrow door but will not find it. Thus the man-made doctrine, hidden with sound doctrine, is bogus.

As a consequence of Adam's sin, all humans are made sinners, Roman 5:19. But in this spiritually dead, separated from God state, they are still able to seek God and trust in Christ.

 

[Zaatar71]

Per Theopedia, this is the standard definition of that term
"Original sin is the doctrine which holds that human nature has been morally and ethically corrupted due to the disobedience of mankind's first parents to the revealed will of God. In the Bible, the first human transgression of God's command is described as the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden resulting in what theology calls the Fall of mankind. The doctrine of original sin holds that every person born into the world is tainted by the Fall such that all of humanity is ethically debilitated, and people are powerless to rehabilitate themselves, unless rescued by God."

Would you support his as a true biblical concept?

Yes for sure. Every Christian church I know has held that truth as biblical.

 

[JesusFan]

Yes for sure. Every Christian church I know has held that truth as biblical.

Ties in with being spiritually dead, and deaf and dumb and blind to God and His bible until :worked on: by the Holy Spirit

 

[Paleouss]

Per Theopedia, this is the standard definition of that term
"Original sin is the doctrine which holds that human nature has been morally and ethically corrupted due to the disobedience of mankind's first parents to the revealed will of God. In the Bible, the first human transgression of God's command is described as the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden resulting in what theology calls the Fall of mankind. The doctrine of original sin holds that every person born into the world is tainted by the Fall such that all of humanity is ethically debilitated, and people are powerless to rehabilitate themselves, unless rescued by God."

Would you support his as a true biblical concept?

Greetings JesusFan.

In general, yes. I say in general because I have heard some varying nuances that I disagree with.

I think Romans 5:14 expresses a message that those between Adam and Moses were dying even though they had not sinned against the only existing law (shall not eat). Thus, original sin was affecting their lives.

(Rom 5:14 NKJV) 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.


Peace to you brother.

 

[Van]

You just keep calling Jesus and Paul liars with this take

Yet another off topic, change the topic, you, you, you post. This behavior marks the behavior of false teachers.

The false and unbiblical claim that as a consequence of the Fall, the lost have no ability to seek God or understand spiritual milk is false.

Some claim to be spiritually dead is to be unable to seek God at all times, but this is just redefining the word dead to fit their bogus doctrine.

Luke 13:24 says many of the lost will seek the narrow door but will not find it. Thus the man-made doctrine, total spiritual inability of the spiritually dead, is bogus. Also the man-made doctrine of Irresistible Grace which compels entry into salvation, is bogus.

As a consequence of Adam's sin, all humans are made sinners, Roman 5:19. But in this spiritually dead, separated from God state, they are still able to seek God and trust in Christ.

 

[Marooncat79]

Yet another off topic, change the topic, you, you, you post. This behavior marks the behavior of false teachers.

The false and unbiblical claim that as a consequence of the Fall, the lost have no ability to seek God or understand spiritual milk is false.

Some claim to be spiritually dead is to be unable to seek God at all times, but this is just redefining the word dead to fit their bogus doctrine.

Luke 13:24 says many of the lost will seek the narrow door but will not find it. Thus the man-made doctrine, total spiritual inability of the spiritually dead, is bogus. Also the man-made doctrine of Irresistible Grace which compels entry into salvation, is bogus.

As a consequence of Adam's sin, all humans are made sinners, Roman 5:19. But in this spiritually dead, separated from God state, they are still able to seek God and trust in Christ.

He was very on topic Van

He responded directly to you

 

[JD731]

The language of original sin is unbiblical.

 

[Marooncat79]

How so

 

[JD731]

Because it is not in the Bible.

 

[Zaatar71]

Because it is not in the Bible.

Did not Adam originally Sin in Genesis? Romans 5 indicates that was the origin of sin. right? So what do you mean when you say it is not in the bible?

 

[JesusFan]

Because it is not in the Bible.

Neither are terms bible nor rapture nor trinity, but the doctrines for each one right there in the concepts explained in bible

 

[JonC]

Per Theopedia, this is the standard definition of that term
"Original sin is the doctrine which holds that human nature has been morally and ethically corrupted due to the disobedience of mankind's first parents to the revealed will of God. In the Bible, the first human transgression of God's command is described as the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden resulting in what theology calls the Fall of mankind. The doctrine of original sin holds that every person born into the world is tainted by the Fall such that all of humanity is ethically debilitated, and people are powerless to rehabilitate themselves, unless rescued by God."

Would you support his as a true biblical concept?

Original sin is biblical. There was a first sin committed when Adam transgressed God's command.

But the Doctrine of Original Sin, the Catholic doctrine maintained by the Reformers, is not biblical as it is not in the Bible.


The Binle speaks of two "natures" - the flesh and the spirit. These are also called the "desires of the flesh" and the "desires of the spirit" as well as "a mind set on the flesh" and a "mind set on the spirit".

Adam waa created flesh. The Second Adam became a life giving spirit.


This is evident in the Fall.

Adam waa flesh, had the desires of the flesh, and followed the desires of the flesh.
So Adam ate of the fruit. His wife gave it to him to eat. It was pleasing to the eye. It was good for food. And it was desirable to make one wise.


The answer to the post is the Doctrine of Original Sin is foreign to Scripture and, while it does create an interesting mythology, adds nothing to Scripture of value but instead corrupts what is written in God's Word.


People will object because people like to belong to certain camps and appear wise in the eyes of men.

But God gives us a very different narrative of Adam, of sin, and of redemption.

 

[JesusFan]

Did not Adam originally Sin in Genesis? Romans 5 indicates that was the origin of sin. right? So what do you mean when you say it is not in the bible?

The actual wording not there, but the concept and doctrine definitely is

 

[JesusFan]

Original sin is biblical. There was a first sin committed when Adam transgressed God's command.

But the Doctrine of Original Sin, the Catholic doctrine maintained by the Reformers, is not biblical as it is not in the Bible.


The Binle speaks of two "natures" - the flesh and the spirit. These are also called the "desires of the flesh" and the "desires of the spirit" as well as "a mind set on the flesh" and a "mind set on the spirit".

Adam waa created flesh. The Second Adam became a life giving spirit.


This is evident in the Fall.

Adam waa flesh, had the desires of the flesh, and followed the desires of the flesh.
So Adam ate of the fruit. His wife gave it to him to eat. It was pleasing to the eye. It was good for food. And it was desirable to make one wise.


The answer to the post is the Doctrine of Original Sin is foreign to Scripture and, while it does create an interesting mythology, adds nothing to Scripture of value but instead corrupts what is written in God's Word.


People will object because people like to belong to certain camps and appear wise in the eyes of men.

But God gives us a very different narrative of Adam, of sin, and of redemption.

Are we born into image of Adam, and thus have sin natures at birth? That would be original Sin doctrine

 

[JonC]

Neither are terms bible nor rapture nor trinity, but the doctrines for each one right there in the concepts explained in bible

I think the issue is doctrine rather than titles.

The doctrine of the Trinity is in the Bible.
Rapture is also in the Bible (those living rising, after the dead, to meet Christ in the clouds).

The doctrine of original sin is not in the Bible.


We need to look at doctrines, not titles of doctrines.

The word "Bible" is not in the Bible, btw.


If I called the doctrine of the Trinity the "Doctrine of the Godhead" then you'd say it's in the Bible because I changed the word of the title.

But we are discussing doctrines - not what they are called.


And if you have not found the Trinity in the Bible...or the Rapture itself....then you need ti take a break here and read your Bible.

 

[JonC]

Are we born into image of Adam, and thus have sin natures at birth? That would be original Sin doctrine

You ate asking is we bear Adam's sin. Yes. Because Adam is like us and we are like him. BUT this is not because of Adam. If you were that first man created then we'd be saying sin entered the world through JesusFan.

Adam is a type. Adam IS us (man).

The readon the Doctrune of Original Sin is wrong is not because it considers Adam to have committed the first sin, or that we share Adam's nature (we are "flesh") but because they add to this an entire mythology (man's nature was altered, man died spiritually, etc.).

The initial doctrine of Original Sin also held that this was the sin for which Chriat died and is washed away by baptism.

 

[JonC]

The actual wording not there, but the concept and doctrine definitely is

Wait...

The words are not there *it is not in "what is written" but the teaching is???

How would you text that against what is written?


The reason I ask is recently we discussed Luther's belief that it is obviously taught in the Old Testament that Jesus ceased to be the Son of God.

If we test that against Scripture then we know it is a heresy. But if we test that against what Luther believed to be the concept and doctrine taught we would accept heresy.

It is the same with Jehovah Witnesses. They can't pass the test of Scripture but they pass the test of what they see as Biblical concepts and doctrines.

And it is the same with your doctrine here. You recognize, to your credit, that the doctrine is foreign to Scripture, but then you defend it by saying it is what you believe Scripture teaches.


Here is my question -

What if Scripture is teaching what is written in God's Word?
What if the text of Scripture IS accurate Biblical doctrine?

 

[Reynolds]

The false and unbiblical claim that as a consequence of the Fall, the lost have no ability to seek God or understand spiritual milk is false.
Some claim to be spiritually dead is to be unable to seek God at all times, but this is just redefining the word dead to fit their bogus doctrine.

Luke 13:24 days many of the lost will seek the narrow door but will not find it. Thus the man-made doctrine, hidden with sound doctrine, is bogus.

As a consequence of Adam's sin, all humans are made sinners, Roman 5:19. But in this spiritually dead, separated from God state, they are still able to seek God and trust in Christ.

Romans 3:11 disagrees with you.

 

[Baptizo]

Every person has inherited what we call “original sin.” By default, they are spiritually unable to do anything good in the eyes of God.

Fortunately, by the grace of God, every person is able to be drawn to God through the Gospel.