In another thread discussing original sin an interesting point was brought up about Jesus.
Christians say that Jesus was totally human and totally God. If at Calvinist say all humans are born totally depraved then it must be assumed they have to believe that Christ was born totally depraved. If he was not born totally depraved then he was not totally human in the accepted Calvinist view of original sin or at least as some have expressed it on this BB. How can this be? I am looking for a rational discussion on this. This seems to be another big problem I see with Calvinist.
I debated with myself which topic I should put this question in on the BB. I did not want to limit the discussion to only Baptist members. So I put it here. "All other discussions" imply debates and includes all members, not just Baptist.
I do not see how you reply added anything to the thread. Maybe you can enlighten me on this and on the topic I raised.
Guess I will just have to pass the statement off as an opinion with no substance behind it. I was hoping for something rational and enlightening. Oh well ...........
I do believe he had no sin ... but he did have free will and could and did make choices ... just the right choices. I believe he was born innocent just as all infants are born innocent. Original sin is an was introduced into Christianity by the 2nd-century Bishop of Lyon Irenaeus's.
My question was I do not see how a Calvinist can hold to original sin as expressed on this BB, and also believe that Jesus was fully human. The two are contradictory in the way they have been described in posts here.
And why do you feel discussion and/or debate is not allowed here. It is in the section called "other discussion" and reads at the top as:
FRIENDLY discussions, NO DEBATE in here please....and no name-calling, no snide remarks in ANY forum. Please abide by the rules. Moderators will be forced to follow protocol.
As usual, the Bible disagrees with you. Ps 51:5 and Ps 58:3 both say that babies are not born innocent. They're born sinners, just like the Bible says.
What's more, Eph 2:3 says that sinners are children of wrath by nature, not that they're born innocent and become children of wrath at some later date.
Well, yeah, if you don't count all of the Bible verses that teach original sin.
And I explained precisely how Jesus can be both sinless and human. You just didn't like the answer.
That's right. "Other discussion", not "debate". "Other discussion" merely means topics that don't necessarily fit into other categories. You know, like somebody who denies original sin and "Christian".
First lets remind the readers that classical Arminians also hold that all men are totally depraved so this isn't really about Calvinism.
In answer to the question: Romans 3:23
for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God
All have sinned. Jesus did not sin. Either there is a contradiction or Jesus does not fit within the category of "all". Obviously the latter is the accepted answer. Same for the doctrine of total depravity - Christ is not considered to fall within the category of "all men". He is his own category - the one who is both God and man.
In short, there is no more contradiction in the doctrine of total depravity than in the teaching that "all have sinned".
Can we find a clue in the fact the we humans are said to have
been corrupted byAdam's sin, not Eve's?
Can we deduce from this that our sinful natures are inherited from our fathers"
If that's the case,then it will explain why Jesus did not have a sinful nature, even though his mother had one.
That would be going considerably beyond what scripture says or implies, and there are several viable explanations. Hence it would be a fallacious deduction. A reasonable speculation maybe, but a fallacious deduction.
Furthermore, such a conclusion would tend to do damage to the larger meaning of the passage. After all, if all dying in Adam is referring to sin being inherited through the father, then how do we take the fact that all are made alive in Christ? Does this imply that salvation is inherited as well? Since we would reject this notion it would be unreasonable to use such verses to argue for father inherited sin.
That is explained pretty easily - Adam wasn't Christ's real father.
In the Hebrew culture, the lineage is traced through the Father's side....__ begat __, __ begat __ .
Many Jews are surnamed "Ben ____" which means "son of ____"
We are "sons" of Adam....so we were born with a sin nature. This is different than sinning.