What is sin nature?

Exactly how is the sin nature passed through Adam? Is it through DNA? If so, Mary's DNA also had a sin nature. Why wouldn't her sin nature have been passed in the same way?

I think Christ was born of a virgin as a sign. If He had been conceived/born in the normal way of having 2 biological parents, He would have been no different than the rest of us. It was also prophesied that He would be born of a virgin, making it a certainty that He was the Messiah that was promised.

I think He was sinless because He is God, not because He was born of a virgin. The virgin birth was a sign.

 

The fact that Mary ("a virgin conceived and brought forth a son...") bears testimony to the fact that right from conception to death Christ was fully man. There was no part in his humanity that he was missing. He was fully man; completely man. He didn't come to earth as a teenager; a three year old toddler, a three month old infant, a three month old fetus, or a three day old embryo!
He started life at the same time that we all started life. He was fully man. He was conceived as a man, born as a man, lived as a man, and died as a man.
At no time during his lifetime as a man did he ever give up his deity. He was always God. He may have chose to lay aside some of his divine attributes at times, or not to exercise them, such as he did when he went to the cross telling Peter to put his sword up because he could have called 12 legions of angels to come and save him if he had wanted to. After all, he was God. But as man he came to submit himself to the will of the Father.

"For by one man sin entered into the world and death by sin...so that all have sinned."
The sin nature comes through that "one man" which is Adam, and is passed down from Adam to generation through generation through the man. Genesis 3:15 speaks of the seed of the woman, an unnatural use of the word "seed" referring to the virgin birth in a promise given to Eve. The Adamic nature is passed down through the "seed" of the man.

Consider the two genealogies and their purposes.
The one in Matthew is to show Christ's right to the throne of David. He is the Messiah, the King of the Jews, the rightful heir to the throne of David. His ancestry points right back to David. The entire gospel of Matthew presents Christ as Messiah, the King of Israel.

The genealogy in Luke goes back even farther, right back to Adam. It presents Christ as perfect "man." Luke rights to the Greeks. He presents to the Greek Christ as a man. Luke also was a physician and shows the human side of Christ more than any other writer. Christ is the perfect man.

But in John we find these verses:
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
--Christ is deity. John presents Christ as God and declares this fact to the world. No man can see God and live.
But God took flesh upon himself in the person of Jesus Christ that we might have a glimpse of who he is.

 

HP: Here is the actual verse without rewording it to stand on all four legs to support ones presuppositions. Ro 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:

Note that it says nothing of sin being caused by one man, or that sin is passed on by one man, or that sin is an unavoidable consequence of the sin of one man, but rather death passed upon all men for ‘all have sinned.’ There is no ‘so that’ as DHK falsely claims when he acted as if though he was quoting Scripture when in fact he was massaging and adding to it in order to make it appear as if though it is in line and supportive of his presuppositions.

 

So, Amy you believe that Christ had a sin nature and was a sinner just like the rest of us?

 

DHK, you have known me for nearly 2 years now, and you know better than to ask me that question. :tear:
Of course I don't think Christ had a sin nature.

I'm just discussing stuff. My question was simply how is the sin nature passed from father to child. Is it through DNA? If so, then the mother can pass it as well. If that is the case, then maybe we're looking at it the wrong way. The Bible is never wrong, only our interpretation.
I do NOT deny one single word of the Bible. I'm just a human with a simple mind and desire to understand things. In order to do that, sometimes I ask questions that may seem silly to others.

I love the Lord Jesus more than anything. :saint:

 

HP: Here DHK merely begs the question by simply assuming men have something he denotes as a ‘sin nature,’ (which by the way the term ‘sin nature’ is not even a Scriptural term,) and then ask a loaded question to Amy which has no validity to it in the least. He attempts to frame the debate around a mere Augustinian assumption and then falsely progresses from his false assumption concerning man, as if though Amy by way of merely asking a question would be applying it to the nature of Christ as well. Speaking of false accusations and acting as if though she implied something she in no wise implied or stated……

Amy, you have every right to ask such questions. Scripture does not tell us why Christ was born of a Virgin nor that He had to be other than as a fulfillment of prophesy. I would suggest that God saw need of giving of Himself, and as such saw need to be part of the act of conception for reasons known only to Himself. There is no logical explanation for the Incarnation revealed to us. What we need to know we have been given. They were to look for a sign of a child born to a virgin just as was prophesied. All the rest of the conjecture DHK has proposed is simply man-made philosophical cover for the unfounded Augustinian presupposition of original sin.

DHK, show the list from the Word of God where it ever speaks of man having a sin nature from birth as you so boldly claim. Show us where the Word of God defines this nature by name, using the Word of God properly by utilizing reasonable rules of interpretation and within the context which it is written.

 

The virgin birth was more than just a sign Amy. It was more than just a fulfilled prophecy. It was the only way that Christ could enter this world, fulfilling all prophecy concerning him, and be born fully man, and without sin. A sinless man was required to be a sacrifice for a sinful race. One sinless man could die for one sinful man. But one sinless God-man could die for all the sinful men of the world.
For this God-man to be without sin, to enter the world without sin, he had to be born without a human father. Read the geneaologies. The genealogies are always (with very few exceptions) through the names of the fathers of the familes. Why?

Luke 3:23-25 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli,
24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Janna, which was the son of Joseph,
25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of Esli, which was the son of Nagge,

Matthew 1:14-16 And Azor begat Sadoc; and Sadoc begat Achim; and Achim begat Eliud;
15 And Eliud begat Eleazar; and Eleazar begat Matthan; and Matthan begat Jacob;
16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

Jesus....son of...
Jacob begat Joseph.....

The Bible often speaks of the seed of the man. The sin nature is passed through what the Bible calls man's "seed." The Bible is not a science book, and does not speak of DNA, chromosomes, genes, genomes, etc. God knew about those things, but the people of the time of Christ didn't, and didn't have to. We need to keep things simple. The sin nature is passed through the seed of the man. It is not a matter of DNA.
Let's look at it in more simple terminology. It is inherited. I have four children. Only one of them has blue eyes. I have blue eyes. She inherited that trait from me. I am her father. But through Adam the sin nature is so dominant that every man (person) inherits it whether they want it or not. It is unavoidable. It is a part of the curse that was put on man. We inherit it from Adam. We don't inherit it from Eve; but from Adam.

 

The word "trinity" as well as scores of other theological terms that you use as well, are not found in the Bible. That is really a lame argument. I suppose you will never again come to the BB to discuss: Theology, Christology, Bibliology, Soteriology, Pneumatology, Harmatiology, Eschatology, Ecclesiology, Anthropology, or Angelology. None of these words are in the Bible. So if you are not up to discussing any of the great doctrines of the Bible, don't bother coming here: they aren't in the Bible. Right?
BTW, Your hero Augustine isn't in the Bible either.
However, the docrine that we know of as man's "sin nature" is found in the Bible.

False assumption #1: that my doctrine is from Augustine--a false accusation.
False assumption #2: That I was falsely assuming anything. Everything that you have said you have been the one who has been falsely accusing me, and of what??
False assumption #3: That what you call a "false accusation" was any more than a "clarifying question."

Yes the Bible does tell us why. For the person who is willing to study the Scriptures and is willing to be open to what the Bible says about it, the Bible has much to say about the virgin birth. But some people (not speaking about Amy) are very close minded.

Perhaps you don't know why Christ was born of a virgin is becasue you choose to study Augustine instead of the Bible. I don't know what Augustine says and I don't care. But I do know what the Bible says, and the Bible has much to say about the virgin birth, and also the sin nature.

Romans 3:9-23 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and misery are in their ways: And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes. Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

All are sinners from birth. We cannot help but sin. It is in our nature. We don't seek after God. We cannot even do good. It is not in our nature to do so.

 

I don't need to speculate on my own reasons! Although I don't agree with every jot and tittle that DHK writes, I do agree with him on this matter. I don't always write a message saying, "I agree" every time I see a post that I agree with - perhaps I should?

I think that two connected but different things are being spoken about on this thread, and it can lead to confusion. One is being a sinner, the other is comitting individual sins. So when you (Darren) say that Jesus was not kept from sinning by being born of a virgin, you are right. (Otherwise He would not have needed to resist the devil's temtations in the Wilderness.) The other thing that has been mentioned a lot on this thread is being a sinner, the "sin nature". With regard to that, the virgin birth was necessary.

 

I think you must have misunderstood me. I certainly do not believe that Mary could save Jesus Christ either from sin, or from the curse of sin. Rather, He came into the world without a human father - God is His Father. Luke 1.34-35:

34 Then Mary said to the angel, "How can this be, since I do not know a man?" 35 And the angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Highest will overshadow you; therefore, also, that Holy One who is to be born will be called the Son of God."

​

He maintained His deity, and thus His holiness, because God is His Father.

I don't really understand what you mean here, particularly by "What they hey," - is that an American expression?

I agree.

 

Are we talking about "sin nature", as in, we have the ability to sin, or are we talking about orginal sin?

Are we damned when we're born because of the sin of Adam? Or do we die spiritually when we commit our first sin?

I don't think I believe in original sin.

 

Darren...since you don't believe God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-present....why would capitalizing His name be a big deal to you? I'm just saying....

 

HP: You’re in Great company! Neither does God.:thumbs:

 

It's nice to agree on something, isn't it? :thumbs: