Arminians, Freewill, and Original Sin

BR, we have landed on a critical area that lands many in much error. So many refuse or fail to see the clear distinction that exists between the sensibilities and the will. They confuse the sensibilities with the will, as if though to be tempted to sin via the influence of the sensibilities is paramount to sinning. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is a foundation error found in Augustian/Calvinistic doctrine.

The sensibilities serve as an influence to sin but are NOT sin in and of themselves. That is why I am opposed to the term ‘original sin.’ It blurrs the distinction between the sensibilities and the will, and suggests that to have a temptation to sin via a proclivity to sin is paramount to being guilty before God for the sins of anotheror the mere existence of an inner influence, proclivity, or temptation to sin.

God, grant us the wisdom to make this distinction clear before our eyes to the end of understanding the true guilt we as sinners should have concerning our sins. Sin is not a matter of inability to do otherwise, but rather is willful rebellion to do otherwise. Only as we see clearly this distinction will we see sin as the heinous act of our will rightfully deserving the vengeance and punishment of a Just and Holy God.