Original Sin and Imputed Sin

[lbaker]

The one where they died when they ate the fruit. God wouldn't deem His creation "good" with a sin nature created in.

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

 

[ReformedBaptist]

I think the whole thing hangs on just what the sinful nature is, and whether or not Adam had one.

What's a scripture that proves A&E didn't have one?

BTW, I read the stuff on the Christadelphians and I definitely am not one of them!

Les

I am glad your not a Christadelphian. It is a horrible heresy.

"Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions." Ecc 7:29

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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

Romans 5:12
""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..."

 

[lbaker]

Romans 5:12
""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..."

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

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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

The Scripture says we are by nature chilren of wrath...sons of disobedience. Sin entered the world through one man's disobedience.

Seems understandable to me. Adam brought sin into the world. All mankind are by nature sinners. They inherited this from Adam. Also, his guilt was imputed to them. Same is true in Christ. All who are IN Christ, as our second Adam, have His obedience imputed to us. This is the whole argument, albeit difficult, in Romans 5

"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." Rom 5:19

 

[lbaker]

Okay, I will study on it.

Les

 

[Brother Bob]

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,

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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,

So we agree that the child is saved by the grace of God. We agree that the child's inherited sin is forgiven through the blood of Jesus Christ. We agree that the child will be raised (all will be raised, some to everlasting life and some to everlasting destruction). I believe the child believes on the Lord Jesus Christ when it is regenerated.

I just don't see much disagreement between us here. I believe the children are encompassed in God's election. As such, God is their Father, Jesus is their Saviour, and the Spirit does the work of regeneration.

 

[Brother Bob]

So we agree that the child is saved by the grace of God. We agree that the child's inherited sin is forgiven through the blood of Jesus Christ. We agree that the child will be raised (all will be raised, some to everlasting life and some to everlasting destruction). I believe the child believes on the Lord Jesus Christ when it is regenerated.

I just don't see much disagreement between us here. I believe the children are encompassed in God's election. As such, God is their Father, Jesus is their Saviour, and the Spirit does the work of regeneration.

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.

 

[lbaker]

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

 

[TCGreek]

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.

 

[skypair]

The Scripture says we are by nature chilren of wrath...sons of disobedience. Sin entered the world through one man's disobedience.

Seems understandable to me. Adam brought sin into the world. All mankind are by nature sinners. They inherited this from Adam. Also, his guilt was imputed to them. Same is true in Christ. All who are IN Christ, as our second Adam, have His obedience imputed to us. This is the whole argument, albeit difficult, in Romans 5

"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." Rom 5:19

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

 

[skypair]

So we agree that the child is saved by the grace of God. We agree that the child's inherited sin is forgiven through the blood of Jesus Christ. We agree that the child will be raised (all will be raised, some to everlasting life and some to everlasting destruction). I believe the child believes on the Lord Jesus Christ when it is regenerated.

I just don't see much disagreement between us here. I believe the children are encompassed in God's election. As such, God is their Father, Jesus is their Saviour, and the Spirit does the work of regeneration.

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]

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

What we are all having a hard time doing is finding the orginal source for Edwards alleged quote. If that could be found, none would deny he said it. If he said it, he said it. Let's just see a primary source. I have googled and googled and can't find a primary source for the quote. I even found school literature with this information, but no source?

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

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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

So your the spokesman for BB now? He is Moses and you are Aaron eh? lol I think Bob and I came to some substantial agreement. Why disrupt that?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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

I hesitate to engage in a controversy with you sp. I have seen what seems to be to me A LOT of sarcasm, talking down to others from you. I hope this can be a civil exchange. Look at lbaker for an example of what I mean by civil. That brother wants to engage and not belittle.

 

[lbaker]

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

 

[ReformedBaptist]

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

I am sorry I haven't replied yet brother, I have been very busy. I should be able to spend some time on this tomorrow. Since we are taking a slice out of Romans 5, let's make sure we don't miss the forest for the trees. Let's make sure we keep in-step with the overall argument of the epistle. Then we can examine each verse, and even dig into the Greek to see if that aids our understanding. I will also consult some commentaries as they alwasy prove helpful.

Your brother,
RB

 

[lbaker]

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

 

[skypair]

Jesus took on human form, sin excepted. He was not born IN Adam as we are. He concieved by the Holy Spirit, not Joseph. He truly was a second Adam.

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