Our sin nature

[billwald]

Bottom line of "sin nature" is that all human activity is tainted with sin, not that all human activity is always sinful.

 

[DHK]

Here's some of my old notes from Catechesis Class concerning what the Orthodox Church believes concerning sin in regard to Adam and Eve and our humanity...enjoy...

The Eastern Church, unlike its Western counterpart, never speaks of guilt being passed from Adam and Eve to their progeny, as did the Western father Augustine. Instead, it is posited that each person bears the guilt of his or her own sin. The question becomes, “What then is the inheritance of humanity from Adam and Eve if it is not guilt?” The Orthodox Fathers answer as one: death. (I Corinthians 15:21). Our nature, teaches Cyril of Alexandria, became “diseased…through the sin of one” (Migne, 1857-1866a). It is not guilt that is passed on, for the Orthodox fathers; it is a condition, it is a disease.
In XC
-

Didn't wade through it all; didn't need to.
No one said that guilt was passed on. Who gave you that idea. It certainly wasn't me. Why not read my posts instead of just assume that I believe Augustine or the RCC. I don't. I believe the Bible, and its teachings.
What your statement says is basically the same that I am saying isn't it?
Adam passed on a condition, the sin nature. It is not guilt. Guilt arises out of that sin nature. We sin because we are sinners, and when we sin we have guilt because we have sinned. Guilt is not passed on. The sin nature is passed on--just as a condition or a disease--an inherited disease.

Romans 2:14-15 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

God put his moral law in the hearts of every unsaved individual on this earth. They know by nature, even their own sin nature, that it is wrong to steal, wrong to commit murder, etc. Their own sin nature tells them that because they have a conscience that tells them right from wrong, which God also gave to man, even in his unsaved condition. The result is, that when man is confronted with sin he will do one or perhaps both of two things mentioned: He will accuse another, and excuse himself of that which he already knows is wrong. Even though he has inherited a sin nature he kinows right from wrong without being taught it. God has written his law upon their hearts. They are without excuse.

Romans 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
--Man is without excuse. He has a sin nature and is still without excuse for not knowing God. The evidence for the existence of God is overwhelming--even God's eternal power and Godhead.
--Man in his sinful state has a knowledge of God, and yet refuses to accept Him.

1 Timothy 4:1-2 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron;
--Again God gives to every man a conscience. That conscience over time, can become so insensitized to sin that it is described as "seared as a hot iron," no longer affected by sin. The sin nature is very active in man. It battles against the spiritual nature that God has given to those that believe.

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Here's my quote concerning guilt being passed on:
"Here lies the issue. Protestants have this impression that when we are born we inherit the guilt of Adam. Per Genesis, what we inherit is death."

No one said that guilt was passed on. Who gave you that idea.

Havensdad replied:
Yes...and guilt, according to Romans...

You DHK replied by accusing me of Pelaginiasm:
"Man is a sinner because he sins; not because he is a sinner; and that is heresy. It is not the "orthodox" teaching of the Bible and never was. Scripture plainly teaches against it--Genesis 3:15; Romans 5:12; 5:19, etc. There are many Scriptures that teach that man inherits a sin nature. But if you prefer to believe tradition over the Bible that is your choice."

So all of my posts have been dealing with the issue of what we inherit and it's NOT guilt...we are responsible for our own sin and our own guilt, I'm not responsible for anyone else's guilt, but my own.

So either you mis-read my posts and finally some Protestant sounding language caught your eye and now you understand or you just saw Augustine, Reformers and Catholic and by your sub-conscience automatically went into defensive mode and started attacking me with Pelaginiasm and heresy.

Anyway, glad we're on the same page, now see if you can convince Heavensdad of his heresy? Or does he get a free pass?

In XC
-

 

[DHK]

Here's my quote concerning guilt being passed on:
"Here lies the issue. Protestants have this impression that when we are born we inherit the guilt of Adam. Per Genesis, what we inherit is death."
In XC
-

I think we are in agreement, but not sure.
Yes, death is passed on to all men. That is true.
But as your statement says, so is the "condition" of man "a disease" as it put it. That condition is a sin nature. Will you agree that not only do we inherit death, but also a sin nature?

Thus one must believe both statements.
I sin because I am a sinner, and
I am a sinner because I sin.

It is not just the latter that is true. But guilt comes only with the consciousness of sin, that I agree. Guilt is a different subject IMO. It is the result of the sin while the sinner is still living.
Death is the ultimate result of sin (on this earth).

 

[olivia529]

Per Catholic theology for instants, how was Jesus born, inheriting Adam’s guilt, but remained sinless? We’ll, we see the dogma of Mary’s Immaculate Conception, meaning God preserved Mary from Original Sin, and thus Jesus wasn’t tainted by Original Sin.


-

Hi Agnus_Dei, I'm new.:wavey:

I'm not sure, but I don't think your view of the reason for the Catholic IC doctrine is correct. At least that is not how my MIL explained it to me, and she said for sure it wasn't related to the need of Christ to be sinless.

But my real question is, how come you have a Latin user-name, your profile says you are a Methodist, but your posts say you are Orthodox?

 

[Agnus_Dei]

Hi Agnus_Dei, I'm new.:wavey:

Welcome to the BB

I'm not sure, but I don't think your view of the reason for the Catholic IC doctrine is correct. At least that is not how my MIL explained it to me, and she said for sure it wasn't related to the need of Christ to be sinless.

Why of course it is, I was contemplating Roman Catholicism before I became Orthodox and went through Catholic RCIA...why do you think the Catholic Dogma of the "Immaculate Conception" exists?

my real question is, how come you have a Latin user-name, your profile says you are a Methodist, but your posts say you are Orthodox?

I was raised a Fundamental Baptist, became Methodist for a short time after I began reading John Wesley which lead to the Early Apostolic, and Church Fathers, which lead me to investigate Roman Catholicism. I then discovered the Baptist Board, signed up as a "Methodist", with a Latin Moniker, and eventually became Eastern Orthodox.

I'm not able to "change" my profile to say "Orthodox" nor am I able to change my latin moniker.

In XC
-

 

[olivia529]

Welcome to the BB

Why of course it is, I was contemplating Roman Catholicism before I became Orthodox and went through Catholic RCIA...why do you think the Catholic Dogma of the "Immaculate Conception" exists?

I was raised a Fundamental Baptist, became Methodist for a short time after I began reading John Wesley which lead to the Early Apostolic, and Church Fathers, which lead me to investigate Roman Catholicism. I then discovered the Baptist Board, signed up as a "Methodist", with a Latin Moniker, and eventually became Eastern Orthodox.

I'm not able to "change" my profile to say "Orthodox" nor am I able to change my latin moniker.

In XC
-

Thanks for the welcome.

Wow, you sound like you've been around the block a few times in terms of different denominations. Seems to be my way too.

About the IC doctrine, I'd have to ask my MIL again for the specifics. It basically is rooted in what Catholics believe about the nature of Christ though. And I remember her specifically pointing out that a lot of people attribute it to some sort of necessity so that Jesus could be sinless, but she said that is not right.

But do the Orthodox not believe Mary was sinless as well? I have a cousin who is Orthodox (converted after he married) and he said they accept whichever church council it was that said Mary was sinless but they reject the IC because they don't view original sin the same way.

 

[Marcia]

It is not guilt that is passed on, for the Orthodox fathers; it is a condition, it is a disease.

I wouldn't call it a disease; it's a natural rebellion against God.

According to the Orthodox fathers, sin is not a violation of an impersonal law or code of behavior, but a rejection of the life offered by God. This is the mark, to which the word amartia refers.

Sin is disobeying God, right? Missing the mark is not just rejecting the life God offers, but it is missing the mark or standard of holiness that is God.

In Orthodox thought God did not threaten Adam and Eve with punishment nor was He angered or offended by their sin; He was moved to compassion. The expulsion from the Garden and from the Tree of Life was an act of love and not vengeance so that humanity would not become immortal in sin.

I think God sounds pretty upset in Gen. 3!


16To the woman He said,
"I will greatly multiply
Your pain in childbirth,
In pain you will bring forth children;
Yet your desire will be for your husband,
And he will rule over you." 17Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it';
Cursed is the ground because of you;
In toil you will eat of it
All the days of your life.
18"Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you;
And you will eat the plants of the field;
19By the sweat of your face
You will eat bread,
Till you return to the ground,
Because from it you were taken;
For you are dust,
And to dust you shall return."

It is true God showed mercy to them, but he always has wrath on sin. In fact, when we are in Christ, we are saved from that wrath.

Romans 1:18
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,

Romans 5:9
Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.

Ephesians 5:6
Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.

Colossians 3:6
For it is because of these things that the wrath of God will come upon the sons of disobedience

1 Thessalonians 1:10
and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, that is Jesus, who rescues us from the wrath to come.


Of course, God was offended by the sin of Adam and Eve. God is utterly holy and righteous; he is offended by all sin.

 

[olivia529]

How about get off the Protestant kick. The Reformers (former Catholics), and then Protestants came along in the 16th Century. There were Christians before then--not Catholics, and not Orhodox. BTW to which of the Reformers do you attribute Baptists to: Calvin, Knox, Luther, etc.? None of the above. They were before the Reformers and fall outside the realm of so-called "Protestantism."

That's interesting. So when do you believe Baptists came about?

 

[ray Marshall]

The new Man, Jesus Christ, had no death in Him. He was not born as we are born, and He didn't have the spiritual nature of death, the devil, in Him. Yet the Bible says in Hebrews 2:9 that He tasted death for every man.

Jesus Christ took upon Himself our sin nature. Hebrews 9:26 says, ... put away sin ( not sins) by the sacrifice of Himself. He took upon Himself our sin nature, the nature of spiritual death, that we might have Eternal Life.

Scriptures to consider: John 10:10; John 5:24. Jesus came to redeem us from spiritual death. Adam was banished from the Tree of Life through rejecting God's Word. according to Rev. 2:7, all who now accept and obeyy the Word of God are brought back to the Tree of Life.


Peace, Golfjack

It is absolutely imposable for man to make a decision in order to be saved. NO,way NO way.
He must be changed from the creature that he is and he CANNOT decide to live for GOD. GOD....gives him the new birth. The man is incapable to make a decision., as long as he is in the nature of man. Beg,plea, intice draw him wherever you like, if not by GOD, he is ruined, period.

 

[billwald]

I'm thankful that Eve engineered our escape from the Garden. I like gardening but it is the weeds and bugs that provide the challenge. Spend eternity pruning rose bushes? No thanks.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

This is LIFE - that eternal Life that one who has the Son, NOW, has. And he now still may love waging war against the bugs and lice better than pruning healthy rose trees for ever--- until the day the bugs have taken over completely.

 

[Marcia]

I'm thankful that Eve engineered our escape from the Garden. I like gardening but it is the weeds and bugs that provide the challenge. Spend eternity pruning rose bushes? No thanks.

There was no toil before the Fall.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

There was no toil before the Fall.

Is this true? I thought Adam was to tend the garden. I thought the curse was just for Adam until the flood where food would not grow easily for him and his work would be hard. but does that doesn't mean he had a job before. It just wasn't as hard. The ground wasn't working against him. But if you read Noah's account God risinded this judgement.

 

[Marcia]

Is this true? I thought Adam was to tend the garden. I thought the curse was just for Adam until the flood where food would not grow easily for him and his work would be hard. but does that doesn't mean he had a job before. It just wasn't as hard. The ground wasn't working against him. But if you read Noah's account God risinded this judgement.

I think the word "toil" implies hard labor.

1. to work hard and continuously; labor
2. to proceed laboriously; advance or move with painful effort or difficulty

I rest my case.