Are men "born in sin"?

Carson --

I am wondering about something and would appreciate your input from your studies.

What you have described above sounds alot like being "dead". Calvinists speak of man as being naturally "dead in sin" and even of men and women being born that way.

If we take the Biblical definition of "dead" (which is NOT the Calvinist erroneous definition), "death" is the state of separation from God (Parable of the Prodigal). To be separated from life is to be dead, right? And since all life is in and from our God, to be severed from Him is to be "dead," right?

Therefore, it seems that mankind is "born dead" naturally because we are born into that state of "original sin" which is the separation from God which is the inheritance Adam left his progeny. And being "born again" is simply coming to unite with the life giving God and have His life -- real life -- as ours.

Thus, if we are "dead" (separated from God) at birth by Adam's sin, we are indeed born with Original Sin (or perhaps Original Separation?)

Your comments or corrections, please?

Thanks,

Brother Ed

PS...to Neal....the Orthodox view of man is the same as the Roman view. Man is not "totally depraved" and "dead" in the Calvinistic sense. He is severely damaged by sin and cannot, without the grace and aid of God, do anything of himself to earn Heaven or repair himself.

 

Hi Jerry,

You continue to misrepresent what I say. I never said that heaven is attainable apart from the grace of God.

I am not misrepresenting what you have said. You are condoning the idea that infants attain heaven apart from the redemption gained by Christ as if immaculate human nature can attain heaven on its own apart from Christ (e.g., infants).

Those who read our dialogue can discern that you are dodging the implication of your interpretation.

Adam & Eve were not in heaven. They were on an Earthly Paradise, and so it follows that a person who never sinned would only attain to this sort of natural paradise. The supernatural life of heaven is what was merited by our Saviour's redemption, and if an individual does not receive this fruit of the redemption, they cannot attain to heaven, thus the need of infants to receive the redemption of Jesus Christ to attain heaven.

Your position is entirely Pelagian because you believe that infants apart from Christ can attain heaven when heaven can only be attained because of what Jesus Christ did on the cross.

It's ironic that in your supposed defense of the Gospel, you have cheapened the Gospel.

 

Since it is appointed unto man "once to die, then the Judgment", and

Since an infant cannot due to the way that God made us, "come to faith by hearing the word of God",

then the infant faces Judgment. Since the infant has not sinned, the Infant will be found "not guilty" of sinning and thus the infant is sprared from the Lake of fire and is given over to Jesus for eternal life. Without sin, one is righteous!

Of course the Apostles tell us that the Faith of the parent is sufficient for the "household", Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house! I wonder if it works the opposite for unbelieving parents? I don't think so, because in spite of the faith condition of the parents, the undefiled infant remains "righteous" in God's eyes.

Is the fate of the child conceived in sin death? Or must the child actually do the sin in order to receive the wage for it?

Then, one must also remember the purpose for Jesus, the Christ to die on the Cross, and that is to take away the sins of the world. So once again, the infant who has not sinned cannot be charged for sin because Jesus paid the penalt for sin whether or not committed.

 

Hi Ed,

I agree with your post.

Hi Jerry,

Have you ever considered the implication of the teaching of Rome in regard to those who die as infants?

No, I never have. I just take what's taught to me in a rote manner without thought - like a zombie - and never consider the implications.

An infant dies,and he dies when he does not know right from wrong. He is absolutely . Why should the poor creature be sent to everlasting punishment?

This is why theologians have formulated the theological speculation of Limbo.

By her theology Rome presents to the world a God who is unreasonable,arbitrary,and capricious

Now you're starting to sound like a Seventh Day Adventist.

Jerry, no infant could ever attain heaven - even without the stain of particular sin. Heaven can only be acquired as a supernatural gift of God by grace.

Your assumption is that we somehow "deserve" heaven - even if we never sin. This is Pelagian.

 

Carson,
No one is advocating someone deserves heaven. It is unmerited favor. You cannot use the scriptures to prove infants are born sinners. God has paid for all sin ( I John 2:2). he paid for the sins of those under the old covnenat who did not even knwo Christ when they were subject to the Law of Moses ( Hebrews 9:15-17). Are you saying becsue of ignoracne they get a free pass,as they could not obey the gospel to be saved ( Hebrews 5:8,9). The gospel of Christ is God;s power to save ( Romasn 1:16).Yet, Abraham, Issac, and Jacob are saved before the gospel ( Mt. 8;11). How? A free pass, or is it by the standard of law under which they lived? If it is by their faith under that law. What law does an unborn infant LIVE under. What sin does he commit (I John 3:4). The Bible says in Gal 5:19,20,Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20  Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21  Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Furthermore, the Bible says in Luke 16:18,Luke 18:16  But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
17  Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

Your theolgy makes forces Luke to make the inspired message read " suffer the little devils to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the kingdom of God. Your doctrine of original sin is false and cannot be harmonized with the totality of the inspired evidence.

Jesus was made of a woman ( Gal. 4:4,5). This would make Christ a sinner. This contradicts the words as theyare found in I Pet. 2:21,22. The Bible says in those passages  For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
22  Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
Of course, this forces you to accept another false doctrine of the immaculate conception. This one is based on BOOK 000, CHAPTER 000, VERSE 000. Oh, what tangled webs false doctrines weave.

 

Carson,

No one is advocating someone deserves heaven. It is unmerited favor that grants heaven. God has paid for all sin ( I John 2:2). He paid for the sins of those under the old covenant who did not even know Christ when they were subject to the Law of Moses ( Hebrews 9:15-17). Are you saying because of ignorance they get a free pass,as they could not obey the gospel to be saved ( Hebrews 5:8,9). The gospel of Christ is God's power to save ( Romans 1:16).Yet, Abraham, Issac, and Jacob are saved before the gospel ( Mt. 8;11). How? A free pass, or is it by the standard of law under which they lived? If it is by their faith under that law. What law does an unborn infant LIVE under. What sin does he commit (I John 3:4)? The Bible says in Gal 5:19,20, Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20  Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21  Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. Furthermore, the Bible says in Luke 18:16,  But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
17  Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.

Your theology forces Luke to make the inspired message read " suffer the little devils to come unto me and forbid them not for of such is the kingdom of God. Your doctrine of original sin is false and cannot be harmonized with the totality of the inspired evidence.

Jesus was made of a woman ( Gal. 4:4,5). This would make Christ a sinner. This contradicts the words as they are found in I Pet. 2:21,22. The Bible says in those passages  For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:
22  Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:

Of course, this forces you to accept another false doctrine of the immaculate conception. This one is based on BOOK 000, CHAPTER 000, VERSE 000. Oh, what a tangled web false doctrines weave.

 

I had to say it twice.

 

Hi Jerry,

Jews did not have a clear revelation of the afterlife. There were different schools of thought regarding whether there would even be a physical resurrection of the body, and generally, Israelities referred to the place after death as Hb. Sheol (Shay-ohl), Gk. Hades, and Eng. Hell, which was also referred to as the Bosom of Abraham.

Quoting an Israelite with regard to the nature of the afterlife after receiving the blessing of Christian revelation is like going to a Medieval doctor for an opinion on which type of reconstructive surgery to choose for your busted knee.

Obvioisly you do not want to consider the implications of the meaning of the word "re-generation" or the meaning of being "born again" in the Spirit.

Jerry, you're being antagonistic. I have considered the implications, and I have already given the etymology of the word as well as its implications in my previous post above.

Enough of the empty, repetitive polemics. Respond to what I wrote specifically instead of blindly repeating these mantras as if mere repetition is convincing.

So why does Rome teach that the believer must "merit" all the graces needed to attain eternal life?: "No one can merit the initial grace which is at the origin of conversion. Moved by the Holy Spirit, we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life, as well as necessary temporal goods"(Catechism #2027)

Did you just cut/paste this paragraph from an Anti-Catholic website or did you read it in context?

What do you think "moved by the Holy Spirit" means?

Read CCC #2011, which precedes #2027:

"2011 The charity of Christ is the source in us of all our merits before God. Grace, by uniting us to Christ in active love, ensures the supernatural quality of our acts and consequently
their merit before God and before men. The saints have always had a lively awareness that their merits were pure grace.

After earths exile, I hope to go and enjoy you in the fatherland, but I do not want to lay up merits for heaven. I want to work for your love alone ... In the evening of this life, I shall appear before you with empty hands, for I do not ask you, Lord, to count my works. All our justice is blemished in your eyes. I wish, then, to be clothed in your own justice and to receive from your love the eternal possession of yourself (St. Therese of Lisieux).

"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace" (Ro.11:6).

You've just quoted the Roman Catholic Council of Trent:

And whereas the Apostle saith, that man is justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the foundation and the root of all Justification; without which it is impossible to please God, and to come unto the fellowship of His sons: but we are therefore said to be justified freely, because that none of those things which precede justification—whether fait or works—merit the grace itself of justification. For, if it be a grace, it is not now by works, otherwise, as the same Apostle says, grace is no more grace (Trent, Decree Concerning Justification, Ch. 8).

 

Jerry:
You have made good points in this thread. It is true men are not born sinners. This is simply making God unmerciful.
Consider Adam and Eve. God told them not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. However, according to the original sin folk God made them sin by making them eat it because God made them sinners.
In short, that would be like me telling my kids do not eat that chocolate, and then forcing them to eat it. Then , as a result of them eatiing it, I beat the stuffings out of them. This is the God of those who espouse this nonsense.

Furthermore, I doubt you will see any response to the scriptures I posted about this subject.