Original Sin

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by webdog, Jan 15, 2007.

  1. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    How do you define it, since it is not actually mentioned in Scripture. My pastor preached on this Sunday, and he holds to the Augustinian view of it, which seems like everyone born would be bound to hell apart from commiting their own sin, even infants and the MRDD. I understand eveyone born inherits a sin nature, but I have a hard time Scripturally with the notion that infants and the MRDD can knowingly break God's Law. I believe all men die a physical death because of sin, but I do not see in the Bible where it shows hell being the punishment for infants and the MRDD who die.

    from wikipedia.org...
    The notion of original sin as interpreted by Augustine of Hippo was affirmed by the Protestant Reformers Martin Luther and John Calvin. Both Luther and Calvin agreed that humans inherit Adamic guilt and are in a state of sin from the moment of conception. This inherently sinful nature (the basis for the Calvinistic doctrine of "total depravity") results in a complete alienation from God and the total inability of humans to achieve reconciliation with God based on their own abilities. Not only do individuals inherit a sinful nature due to Adam's fall, but since he was the federal head and representative of the human race, all whom he represented inherit the guilt of his sin by imputation.
     
    #1 webdog, Jan 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2007
  2. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1


    In the same way that all who were chosen in Christ are imputed Christ's righteousness.
     
  3. Helen

    Helen
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/Helen2.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    11,703
    Likes Received:
    1
    webdog, you cannot inherit guilt.

    Original sin is simply another name for the first sin. The first was the original, at least for the human race.

    We do inherit a sin nature. But our sins are our own and our guilt is our own. The consequences of a person's sin can affect those around him and his progeny, but guilt is different. You cannot be guilty of something you did not do!
     
  4. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    Big difference in being "in Christ" and not knowing what sin is, pinoy. Those in Christ made a conscious decision to be "in Christ" while an infant and MRDD cannot make conscious decisions on sin.
     
  5. Jon-Marc

    Jon-Marc
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Messages:
    2,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    God is not so unjust as to condemn babies or anyone who is mentally incapable of understanding what sin is.
     
  6. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    ...

    Adam was the "federal head" of the FLESH. All die PHYSICALLY, NOT spiritually, on his account.

    Christ is the "federal Head" of all spiritual men. All live SPIRITUALLY but NOT Physically, if the believe on Him!

    So as to infants and the insane -- They die physically in Adam quite often. They do NOT die spiritually in Adam but only of their own sin -- that is, they are justified on account of innocence of any sin spiritually.

    Original sin is just that -- original. It was Adam eating the forbidden fruit, period.

    skypair

    P.S. It has ocurred to me more than once that religion has damned the infants in order to provide some salvation to them through the workings of the church in infant baptism. I don't know if y'all are familiar with the term "sacral society" or "sacal community" but it entails the government of men through religion (ala Calvin-Geneva style). On another thread someone posited that infants were baptized into the Christian "community" (much as Jewish boys were circumcised into the Jewish community where the relgiion was the law also). But such traditions, I think all can see, had NOTHING to do at all with salvation as both Jews and Reformers leaders were sometimes wont to make it appear.

    There's a good book on this called "Reform's Stepchildren." When I get home, I'll try to remember to post it exactly but it shows that "Philadelphia" lives in a truly unique time of "composite society" where, IAW 1Cor 11:19, all "sects" have an opportunity to be heard so that those which are "accepted"/true can be discovered.
     
    #6 skypair, Jan 15, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2007
  7. DQuixote

    DQuixote
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's pretty good. I had not looked at it that way before. In fact, I'm really pleased by it and the post by Helen.
     
  8. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you, DQ. :thumbs:

    Here's that book title in case anyone was waiting for it: The Reformers and their Stepchildren by Leonard Verduin. We actually went through it chapter-by-chapter on another board -- very interesting!

    From it, we can see most all societies before America as "sacral" -- societies set up by "religionists," pagan and "God-centered" alike (Babel, ... Egypt, Babylon, Greece, Israel, Rome, Reform nations) for their own agrandizement in the name of religion/state religion. True worship of God was persecuted in all of these to a greater or lesser degree -- which is why the Puritans and such "stepchildren fled Reform countries and established "compostie (freedom of religion) societies" in America.

    Does that suggest anything to anyone regarding the roots of Reform theology?? Like that they were trying to - or making the pretense of - setting up Christ's kingdom on earth??

    skypair
     
  9. russell55

    russell55
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    No one says that they knowingly break God's law.

    It doesn't say that hell is actually the end result for infants, etc. who die. What it does say is that their inherited sinful nature itself--whether they've actually knowingly committed sin or not--makes them objects of God's wrath. We are all, by nature--or how we were born, how we are constitutionally--objects of God's wrath.

    When we do break God's law, we increase out guilt. By committing actually sins we add to our condemnation, or, you might say, we store up wrath.

    That doesn't necessarily mean infants who die go to hell. What it does mean is that in order to be in heaven with God, even infants need the application of Christ's death and the changed nature that comes as a result of it. They need a new nature without the seed of sin--the seed that would surely blossom, were they to grow, into fullblown sin.

    Innocence (not having actually committed a sin) is not the same thing as righteousness (having the kind of nature that will produce righteous works). So an infant who goes to heaven goes because of God's mercy, too. Eternal life is something that comes through the work of Christ alone, even for infants.
     
  10. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you. You beat me to saying the same thing, and you said it so much better than I would have.
     
  11. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    "Some through the waters, some through the flood, some through the fire, but all through the blood............." goes the song. I'll venture to say that many in this board probably sang this last Sunday in their churches. I'll venture also to say that among those who sang this song are Arminians, Calvinists, and "Biblicists".
    Now, in relation to this thread (I hope) and the arguments on babies and infants that the OP spawned lately about no babies going to hell, and in other threads, God not having elected anyone to salvation and vice-versa, I would like to know how this song can be true, when this song is true, and why this song is true.

    And for the record, I do not believe infants who die in infancy, or in the womb, ever go to hell. I believe in God's omniscience He knew every person in this planet who will die in infancy and in the womb, and therefore He took care of their destination.
     
  12. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are many songs with flaws in it that I refuse to sing. For instance, in "you are my king" the verse that states "in all I do, I honor you", I don't know how any Christian can sing that verse. Songs are not immutable truth :)
    Why don't you feel infants go to Hell? From what I gather from calvinists here, election doesn't = salvation, but chosen to partake of salvation. Calvinists also claim faith to be necessary in salvation. So if you add these two together, even an "elect" infant needs to have faith in Christ. If not, they go to Hell. Even "elect" infants cannot have faith in anything let alone the details of the Law, sin and the need for a Savior. My son doesn't even have faith that I will feed him on time...he screams his lungs out! :)
     
  13. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Why don't I believe infants go to hell ? Because there is nothing in the Bible that says we go to hell because of inherited nature. Why are those who are sent to the lake of fire condemned ? Is it because of their inherited nature ?

    No.

    It is because of the deeds that arose out of that inherited nature.

    Their works damned them.

    What are the works of an infant in the womb, or out of it, that damned that infant ? Sure it has a fallen nature. A man and a woman can fornicate in front of an infant, and that infant won't even know it. Like a monkey who has never seen a gun and pokes its finger into the barrel.

    How quickly some pronounce damnation on babies they have no right to pronounce. Yet, perhaps in jury duty, those same souls will refuse to send someone to the gas chamber, the electric chair, or the needle because of a perceived lunacy in the guilty, and let him/her live.

    Secondly, I do not believe one's exercising of faith in Christ saves that person. It is the faith of Christ that pleased God, and which is without flaw. One's exercising of faith in Christ is proof of one's spiritual rebirth.

    How can a baby exercise faith in Christ to its credit and its salvation ?

    And out of respect for you, my dear Webdog, let me continue the question about that song in another thread, lest further discussions of it hijack your thread on original sin.

    Cheers.
     
    #13 pinoybaptist, Jan 16, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 16, 2007
  14. webdog

    webdog
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2005
    Messages:
    24,691
    Likes Received:
    0
    While I don't agree with your faith assessment, I do agree with your assesment of guilt and newborns, that they are not born "sinners". Unfortunately, your view is in the minority amongst calvinists, as the Augustinian view adopted by Calvin has all babies being born sinners from birth.
     
  15. russell55

    russell55
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, but they believe that elect infants are regenerated by the Spirit and as a result have faith, although it will be faith that is a little different than that of a capable adult. Remember, that Calvinists believe that faith is a supernatural work of God, and God can work it where he pleases. Granted, they will not be able to understand the content of the gospel, but in some way we might not be able to comprehend, their attitude toward God will be changed from the estrangement that they are born into.

    From the London Baptist Confession:

     
  16. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    You do not agree that it is Christ's faith only that pleased God, and that only Christ's faith is without flaw ?
    Surely you jest, my dear friend.
     
  17. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chapter and verse. I dealt with this "genitive case use of Christ" elsewhere. So if you will kindly list Chapter and verse I will show you grammatically why you are wrong is using such a construction.

    (1) Where does the Bible state that regeneration is first
    (2) Where does the Bible state that after regeneration God infused faith so that one then has the "ability" to believe


    You will not find one verse in the Bible that teaches clearly that "believing faith" is a gift that is given to a person after they are brought to life whereby they are then enabled to believe. Absolutely No Where.
     
    #17 GordonSlocum, Jan 16, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 16, 2007
  18. GordonSlocum

    GordonSlocum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Matthew 9:2. And behold, they brought to Him a paralytic lying on a bed. And Jesus, seeing their faith, said to the paralytic, "Son, be of good cheer; your sins are forgiven you.''

    Mark 2:5. When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven you.''

    Luke 5:20. So when He saw their faith, He said to him, "Man, your sins are forgiven you.''

    Who’s faith “the faith of the paralytic and those who brought him” the saving and healing faith is the “faith of these not the faith of Jesus.

    Mark 7: 50. Then He said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you. Go in peace.

    Who’s faith? The faith of the woman. Did you notice the construction I just used. It was the genitive case describing the woman’s faith. Jesus told here that it was her faith. It is just as proper to say it this way, “the faith of the woman” is the same as “her faith”, “your faith”, or in the plural “their faith”.

    42. Then Jesus said to him, "Receive your sight; your faith has saved you.''

    Who’s faith? The faith of the blind man healed and saved him.

    Acts 26: 15. "So I said, `Who are You, Lord?' And He said, `I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting.
    16. `But rise and stand on your feet; for I have appeared to you for this purpose, to make you a minister and a witness both of the things which you have seen and of the things which I will yet reveal to you.
    17. `I will deliver you from the Jewish people, as well as from the Gentiles, to whom I now send you,
    18. `to open their eyes and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.'

    Forgiveness, inheritance and sanctification all received “BY FAITH IN ME” Will you call Jesus a liar my friend?


    Romans 3:22. even the righteousness of God which is through faith in Jesus Christ to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23. for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
    24. being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25. whom God set forth to be a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26. to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

    Romans 4:5. But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,

    Romans 5: 2. through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

    Notice that access to Grace is by faith. The faith of the one believing.

    Galatians 2:16. "knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.

    Galatians 3: 22. But the Scripture has confined all under sin, that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

    Galatians 3:26. For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

    Ephesians 1:15. Therefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints,

    Philippians 3:9. and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith;
     
  19. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, you will have to prove to the King James translators why they are wrong. They were born, raised and bred in the English language, the same as you were. Here they are:

    Romans 3:22; Galatians 2:20 ; 3:16. 22; Philippians 3:9.

    Turn those verses into saying it is OUR faith in Christ that justifies us before God (not before man) and then prove to me chapter and verse why salvation is by grace. If our faith in Christ is the one that pleased God and caused Him to save us, then grace is no longer grace. Again, those verses, and those verses only.

    John 1:12 - For as many as received Him, to them gave He the power to become sons of God, even to them that believe on the Name of the Son of God;
    John 1:13 - Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of men, but of God.

    Now I throw the challenge back at you. Here is the verse: Prove through this same verse, that their being born by the will of God, did not precede their receiving Christ, even their believing on the Name of the Son of God.


    Can you show to me where in the Bible the word rapture is ? Surely the word is not there, but the concept and principle is.

    My stand on this board has always been firmly on the Scriptures. Scriptures show that there are two aspects of salvation. One is ETERNAL, over which man has no say at all. It is all of God, none of man. It was planned in eternity past by the Triune God for a definite number of the fallen seed of Adam.
    It is all OF GRACE, because none was required of man to possess it. It was freely given through Christ and in Christ. The individual is not required to have the correct theology, the correct race, the correct doctrine, the correct time to live or have lived, the correct conduct, because while it was selective it was also universal in that both Jews and Gentiles are recipients of it.
    In God's eternal and infinite mind, it was a done deal.
    The elect, whoever and wherever they are, be in the womb, or out of it, are already all seated in God's heaven in Christ.
    Since this aspect is ALL OF GOD, then the transaction was between the Triunity, and Faith was exercised on all three sides. Faith in each other, faith in the ability and willingness of the Son to do the will of the Father.

    On the other hand, the second aspect is believeing faith on the part of the elect individual to whom the gospel comes. While the gospel has no part in the eternal salvation of all the elect, it does play a part in their timelysalvation. They are required to repent upon hearing it, and the result being their turning to God from idols, and their obedience to the gospel and exercising of faith in Christ. But no unregenerate man can exercise this faith on his own, therefore the Holy Spirit must convict them, and bring them to life for them to be able to obey the gospel.

    Timely salvation thru the hearing of the gospel and belief, is a benefit that not all elect children of God reaps here on earth and one simple reason is that not all gospel preachers are able or will ever be able to reach every inhabitant of this earth. Only God is omnipresent.

    Infants for example, cannot hear and understand the gospel for them to be able to worship God in the beauty of His holiness, nor to live peaceably with their neighbors, nor to pray without ceasing. Neither can those born with mental challenges do the same, or those who at a very early age dealt with sickness that affected their mental growth and comprehension.
     
    #19 pinoybaptist, Jan 17, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 17, 2007
  20. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Infant baptism, I suppose??

    Innocents HAVE the righteousness of God -- "...for of such is the kingdom of heaven." They don't have the sanctification of one who believes and receives Christ but they are just. So guess what --- after their souls spend a period of time in heaven, their bodies will be resurrected postrib and they will get to choose Christ in another life (which is another thread, I'm sure).

    But your view is probably skewed by some lingering misunderstanding of infant baptism, right?

    skypair
     

Share This Page

Loading...