Texts That Do NOT Support Original Sin

Grahame: Can anyone answer the question I asked and that was
Quote:
if man is not physically, spiritually and morally fallen, why then are there no sinless people in the world today? If man is born perfect and sinless, is it realistic to think that a person can learn righteousness?


I can, but I am going to save that for later.

God:smilewinkgrin:

 

I ended up with a few extra minutes.

Grahame, I will make you a deal. If you can tell me why Satan fell, when every other sentient being was up until then obedient, or why a third of the angels followed him, or why 100% of the first pair on earth disobeyed, in a perfect environment and having a Perfect parent, I might have an answer.

I don’t have to have a 'reason' why all have. I believe it is termed the mystery of iniquity. My knowledge stops where Scripture is silent. If there was 'a reason,' other than all have chosen to sin, something else would be the cause of sin, and if something else is the cause of sin, it would be unjust for God to punish man for something he could not have avoided.

The mere fact that God blames and praises man is proof that man can indeed do something other than what he does under the very same set of circumstances. Just the same, all indeed have sinned.

That is my answer, having none.

 

HP: Now that we have fully left the thrust of the OP, I might as well proceed for a while at least until other verses are brought up.

Let me ask you. (I believe you are a reasonable man therefore I will bypass my questions, assuming for times sake that we would agree on the basic ideas of justice etc.) If a child is not innocent and guilty of sin, Scriptures indicate all that sin and that have not accepted Christ will be punished. Sin is the transgression of the law. What law do the innocent transgress, and what will be their fate? I am looking not for philosophical answers, but Scriptural references to establish your answers. If Christ’s blood atones for their sins automatically, show me the passage.

If Scripture states that "for such is the Kingdom of heaven," and in order to enter heaven we must become as one of these little children, are we to suggest that we must all be sinners as they are and lawbreakers such as being a sinner implies?


I see no other Scriptural or reasonable position to take than children, before an age of accountibility, are indeed innocent of any and all sin.

 

HP: The reasons why I did not desire to get into these questions are because in order to do so effectively we would have to first discuss many other issues. Here are just a few. What is sin? What is the penalty for sin? Can anyone be held accountable for the sins of another? What were the effects of sin on mankind, spiritually, physically, and otherwise. What effects do these have on us today? Are we moral beings? What does being a moral being suggest? What does it mean to die, spiritually? Was man created as a mortal? What are the implications of that? Etc. etc.

We have a lot to discuss.

 

HP: I argue no such thing. No man is born in sins. Impossible. Sin is a transgression of the law. There is no law possible for an infant to transgress. Sin is not a disease, it is the willful transgression of a known commandment of God.

I believe the Psalmist was using poetic language that basically conveys the idea that to him it seemed ‘as if though’ those that he saw as wicked were that way from the earliest light of moral agency. David was not establishing a doctrine foreign to and simply not believed by the Jews.

 

HP: Absolutely. More than likely millions of them, most of tem infants, individuals that have not reached the age of accountability, or those that never will. Does that shock anyone?

HP: All that reach the age of accountability sin and as sinners are in need of Christ according to Scripture. All have sinned and came short of the glory of God.

HP: No amount of good works could make up for one sin. Once we transgress the law in one point we come under condemnation and our only hope is to have a redeemer, i.e. the man Christ Jesus.

Whether one likes it or not, or whether or not it fits into ones doctrinal scope of things, Jesus did state clearly that one could indeed inherit eternal life by keeping the commandments. It is within the ‘realm of possibilities’ according to Christ, but we are clearly told that none in our dispensation have or will. If it were not possible, then sin is unavoidable, and as such man is created a sinner, not by choice but by destiny. When you start down that path, you cannot escape the logical deduction that God is the Author of all sin and punishes sinful man in an eternal hell for a state that one could not escape. Sin becomes a disease instead of the willful rebellion against a known commandment of God that Scripture states it is.

If you ask me about ‘possibilities’ in the OT, I would point to Enoch and Elijah. Neither man saw death, IF in fact that is any indication or not, I am not certain, but I believe the possibility exists just on the account of the way God dealt wit them at the end of their life on earth. We will see when we get to heaven, won’t we?

HP: Scripture does not indicate what babies need. Sure, every sentient being needs God, and Christ being the Son of God, God Incarante, all need Him in one way or another.

The question is whether or not babies need salvation. I say no. You cannot be saved without hearing the gospel, repenting for your sins and accepting the atoning work of Christ by faith according to the Word of God. If you try preaching that in a nursery, before long you are going to feel a lot worse that Jeremiah ever did.

As for children, “For such IS the kingdom of heaven.”

God will handle the case of infants and those that never reach moral accountability. I refuse to accept Augustine’s heathen notion that sin lies in the physical makeup of man, and not in the will. It is not supported by Scripture, reason, or experience.

 

HP: Only when we learn what God’s law is, and transgress it, is he held responsible, and as such sins, and becomes guilty before God.

“ Where there is no law, sin is not imputed.” To have sin imputed to our account is for God to judge our intents as sinful. Without the ability to formulate an intent that could be judged of God as sinful, sin is not possible.

You have God declaring someone in violation of His law that cannot even comprehend His law. Such a notion is simply without reason and contrary to the Word of God.

 

HP: You have God declaring someone in violation of His law that cannot even comprehend His law. Such a notion is simply without reason.

HP: Forgive me Webdog if that is not what you implied. I should know by now that many can say the same things when really they may not be insinuating what others are saying when they use the same terminology. When I hear one say that we are born with a sin nature, that usually depicts one that believes we are born as sinners. If you do not hold to that belief, forgive me. I sure am not trying to tear down any fences we can build together.

I can even say that I believe that man is born with a ‘nature to sin,’ if in fact by 'nature' you are referring to a proclivity to sin due to the influence of the physical sensibilities. I would never state that such is sin, but again, a tendency, or a proclivity to sin. What I do not believe Scripture states in way shape of form, is OS or that men are born morally depraved. We are born physically depraved, and that depravity indeed serves as a proclivity to sin, but sin, being a moral issue, can only be committed subsequent to becoming a moral agent.

 

HP: Scripture affirms that all have sinned, and calls on all men everywhere to repent. I believe you have a good understanding of the nature of sin and why God holds them responsible.

I again apologize for reading into your post something you had not intended.

This is a foundational truth that effects almost every other doctrine held by man. When we cannot understand the essential elements that must be in play for an intent to be judged as sin by God, legion is the errors that will and do follow.