I’m here out of a sincere interest in discussing, questioning, and learning about this topic. Debate is not my motive. I’m an 18-year professed disciple of Christ serving in a local Baptist church so I’ve studied this topic over and over again and am well acquainted with the verses, interpretations, and theological views surrounding it. The “sin nature” is a common term used among Baptists denominations. So I’m not going to spend time reiterating what is generally taught about it. I’ll assume anyone reading this post will already have their own ideas about it. The reason we teach someone “needs to be saved” seems to hinge upon the whole idea of the “sin nature”. Most say that Rom. 3:23 places the entire human race in a “lost” (i.e. “going to hell”) condition and use it as a preliminary step to help the “lost” one understand their need for Christ. With this in mind, consider this with me. This idea implies that if there is no “sin nature”, there is no need for Christ. Now I’m not arguing that we are not sinful beings. Certainly we are. Yet we will probably also agree, that a good, moral person, is still “a sinner” and “needs to be saved”. Are we emphasizing the vulgarity and crudeness of what we call “Sin” to make the scriptures say something beyond what is intended? For example, we’ll probably also agree that the word “sin” has a meaning very plain and simple; to “miss the mark”. The term itself does not have to do with the darkest evil that any human being can carry out. Rom. 3:23 certainly doesn’t say “all have committed the ugliest and most vile sins ever to be committed”. Yet at the same time, we’ll use a verse like this to support the idea of a “sin nature”; that all human beings are prone to do ungodly things due to an innate characteristic inherited from the fall of Adam. Furthermore, we also say that this is the very reason for Christ our need for a Savior. Thus Rom. 3:23 turns into a verse that says “this is the reason we all need to be saved”. I’m wondering if we’ve overdone it. In my mind, we need Christ INSPITE of sin. That’s why a good, moral person needs to trust in God just as much as a murderer does. And I wonder if the “sin nature” really isn’t what we’ve made it out to be (if there really is such a thing to begin with). We’ll agree that children, under the “age of accountability”, will not be sent to hellfire (thus saying they’re not “lost” and do not need to “accept Christ”). We’ll also debate over those who do not have a mental capacity to comprehend their need for salvation and place them in the same class as children. For the rest of us, we apply the idea of “sin nature” and suggest that it is the reason for our need to “accept Christ”. We’ll also say that we were “born this way” and use the handful of common scriptures to support this. Are we sure that the scriptures really say this? Is the “sin nature” really the trigger that puts us in need of a Savior? Or do we need Christ regardless?