Original Sin and Imputed Sin

Okay, where's the verse that shows Adam acquiring the sinful nature?

 

But that just says "sin entered into the world, and death by sin..." and nothing about Adam being given a sin nature sometime after the Fall.

Isn't there a verse somewhere that says something along the lines of "and Adam now had aquired a sin nature because of..."?

Unless there is, it looks like we're just assuming that Adam's capability of being tempted, and capability of sinning, isn't just a part of our basic human nature.

Les

 

Okay, I will study on it.

Les

 

A infant is born into this world capable of sin but without sin. It was appointed unto the infant to die, because of one man (Adam). If it dies in that state, it has no actual sin and by the Grace of God, heaven will be its home. But when it comes:

Rom 1:21Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Then the child has its own sin and the second death is pronounced upon it and it stands in need of a Saviour.

Even if it had a sin, where there is no law, sin is not imputed. I am one who does not believe that infants are capable of sinning. It has to die a natural death because of Adam's sin, then it has met its appointment to die. If not for the Grace of God, that would be the end of that child, for there would be no purpose to raise it from the dead. It has no sin for the second death, it has no faith for the saved, if it has faith, it does not know what it is, so that would be the end, except there is the Grace of God which covered all, and it will be resurrected for eternal life, has no sin to condemn it, so such is the kingdom.

BBob,

 

I believe the child will believe in the resurrection for all will believe then, every eye shall behold Him and every tongue shall confess. Regeneration I would think would take place when it died, I believe its soul would then be taken to heaven, until the resurrection. I had to give that some thought.

Glad we agree on something.

 

Good morning RB,

Well I've been pondering the passage in Romans 5 as well as the others you gave in the OP and still don't see a convincing case for Original Sin.

But, it is pretty obvious that we do have a tendency to sin and I think even Adam had this from the beginning. Maybe it's really nothing more than what we think of as "free will", meaning that left to ourselves, we will inevitably favor our will over God's will and sin.

Also, it looks like we do inherit the physical penalty of sin from Adam, physical death, but not the eternal consequences. We have to "earn" that for ourselves.

If you want to pursue it, we can go through the scriptures you provided and kick it around some more.

BTW - I noticed you used quotes from Jonathan Edwards a couple of times. Your discussion with BB about the fate of infants brought an alleged quote by Edwards to mind, the one about hell being paved with the skulls of unbaptized children. Do you know if that is accurate or not. I've read that it is (in a Western Civ college textbook) and that it isn't (in web blogs). Not trying to impugn Edwards here, or use this as a "gotcha" type thing, just curious as to your opinion.

Thanks,

Les

 

1. Adam, if you will, must be seen as the genome of sin. There's something about the warning "the day you sinned you will die" that has everything to do with the sin nature innate in man and principally Adam.

2. Now, whether or not we are able to fully decode the statement "the day you eat you shall surely die" is another issue.

 

But Rom 5:13 --- sin is NOT imputed where there is no law. Therefore, sin is NOT imputed to all that ever lived. Infants, those before the law, etc. there are exceptions --- it is not a "cut and dried" as you make it out to be.

skypair

 

No -- an infant is justified according to innocence." In the resurrection (as Bob was thinking), he/she will be resurrected to earth among the "just" and have an opportunity to be saved then.

skypair

 

ReformedBaptist - I would like to go verse by verse through Romans 5.

Let's do it! That should be a good excercise, whatever our conclusions.

Oh, and hey, thanks for the compliment.

Les

 

No problem, let's take our time with this and not "shoot from the hip".

I'll be slower to check the board and reply over the weekend by the way, so don't think I'm ignoring you if I don't respond promptly.

bro. Les

 

But since sin is "imputed" according to you, He didn't need to be born of man to be sinful/a sinner.

Look, right out of the blocks you err. NO infant has sin guilt per Ezek 18:20 "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." TWO doctrines taught in one verse: 1) you must commit sin for your soul to "die" and 2) sin guilt does NOT pass generation to generation. It may be "visited" on one generation to the next -- be an overwhelming temptation -- but the guilt thereof is never "imputed" to the next until it sin itself.

skypair