Thread: The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Admin
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 08:34 AM
THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN [1]
Written by Ron Hutchison
One of the major doctrines in the religious world today is the doctrine of original sin, or that human beings are born with a sinful nature. The Bible teaches in 1 Peter 4:11, "If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God." Certainly, if we are going to teach anything in religion, it must be what the Bible teaches. We must speak as the oracles or word of God speaks.
I have been having an email discussion for several months now with a friend who believes this doctrine, and it has really encouraged me to restudy this subject to make sure that what I believe about it is what the Bible teaches. Thus, I wanted to set out what the Bible teaches about this doctrine and I pray that both you and I will be like the fair-minded Bereans and search the scriptures daily to see whether the things taught in this lesson are true (Acts 17:11). We all need to desire to be right with God and if we find that what we have believed about a subject or what we have been taught all our life about a subject conflicts with the Bible, then we must have the attitude of being willing to change our belief to be in harmony with Bible teaching.
WHAT YOU BELIEVE WILL AFFECT YOUR ATTITUDE AND ACTIONS
Were you born with a sinful nature? The answer that you give to this question will affect your attitude toward sin and will ultimately affect your conduct as well, because a person's views on sin cannot help but affect his conduct. If one believes he is born with a sinful nature and sins because of that nature, he's not very likely to view his sins with the seriousness that he should. If he believes he has a nature that makes holiness impossible, he's not likely to be concerned about sinning against God. If he believes that God is his Creator and that he has been created with a sinful nature, this will necessarily affect his attitude toward God and the justice of God's dealings with man.
Are people born with a sinful nature? Our answer to this question is very important, because how we answer it will have a direct bearing on our attitude toward sin, toward God, and toward holy living.
"DOES THE BIBLE TEACH IT?"
One of the things that makes this doctrine believable to many people are passages in the Bible which seem to teach it. One of those passages is Psalm 51:5 which says, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me" (NKJV). This verse settles it for most people. If the Bible says we were "brought forth in iniquity" and "conceived in sin," then that must mean that we were born with a sinful nature. Of course the New International Version (which is a very popular version in the religious world today) paraphrases this verse rather than translates it. It renders it, "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."
This text, if taken literally, might teach that people are born sinners. But the language of this text is not literal, it is figurative. Both context and reality demand a figurative interpretation of this text.
For example, compare Psalm 51:5 with Job 1:21, which says: "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return there." If Psalm 51:5 can be interpreted literally to teach the doctrine that David and all other people are born sinners, then Job 1:21 can be interpreted literally to teach the doctrine that Job and all other people will some day return to their mother's wombs.
Friend, we have to recognize that there is such a thing as figurative language in the Bible. Neither Psalm 51:5 nor Job 1:21 is to be understood literally. They are both figurative expressions. Both context and our knowledge of reality demand a figurative interpretation of these two texts.
David uses figurative language throughout the Psalms. In fact in Psalm 51, verses five, seven, and eight are all figurative expressions. So if verse five can be made to teach that men are born sinners, then verse seven can be made to teach that hyssop cleanses us from sin because it says, "Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean." Also, verse eight can be made to teach the doctrine that God breaks the righteous persons bones when he sins, and that his broken bones rejoice when he is forgiven because it says, "Make me hear joy and gladness, that the bones You have broken may rejoice."
If verse 5 of Psalm 51 can be taken literally, then another of David's Psalms, Psalm 58:3, can be made to teach the doctrine that babies speak from the very moment they are born: "The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies." Who would seriously conclude that Psalm 58:3 is teaching that babies actually do speak as soon as they are born? No one in his right mind would, because both revelation and experience teach us that they do not. The fact is that none of these passages are meant to be understood in a literal sense. They are all figurative expressions. If they were understood literally, they would all teach what we know to be contrary to reality. Reality teaches us that bones do not rejoice, hyssop does not purge sin, babies do not speak as soon as they leave the womb, and an unborn child is not born with a sinful nature.
The same method of interpretation that would permit Psalm 51:5 to teach that babies are born with a sinful nature, would, if applied to these passages, allow for every kind of perversion and wild interpretation of God's Word. Look again at the words of Job 1:21: "Naked I came from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return there." Are we to take these word literally? Did Job mean to teach that he and all other people would some day go back and enter into their mother's wombs? We know that such a meaning would be ludicrous. But it is just as reasonable to interpret Job 1:21 to teach that Job and all other people will some day go back into their mother's wombs, as it is to interpret Psalm 51:5 to teach that David and all other people are born sinners. David was not teaching in this passage that he was born a sinner. Instead he was confessing to God the terrible guilt and sinfulness of his heart, and he cried out to God in strong language, the language of figure and symbol, to express that terrible guilt and sinfulness.
If David intended to affirm that he was literally "brought forth in iniquity and conceived in sin," and that means he was born a sinner, then he affirmed absolute nonsense, and he charged his Creator with making him a sinner; for David knew that God was his Maker:
DID GOD MAKE MAN A SINNER?
David affirmed, "Your hands have made me and fashioned me" (Psalm 119:73). He further wrote, "Know that the LORD, He is God; It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves;" (Psalm 100:3). Are we to understand from these passages that God fashions people into sinners in their mother's wombs? Of course not. All of us know that God does not create sinners. Yet, upon the supposition that Psalm 51:5 teaches that men are born sinners, these texts could teach nothing else. Who cannot see that the doctrine that men are born sinners charges God with creating sinners? It represents man as being formed a sinner in his mother's womb, when the Bible clearly teaches that God forms man in his mother's womb. It represents man as coming into this world a sinner, when the Bible clearly teaches that God creates all men. You may object that God created only Adam and Eve, and that the rest of mankind descended from them by natural generation. But this objection does not relieve the doctrine of an inherited sinful nature of its slander and libel of the character of God. For if man has a sinful nature at birth, who is it who established the laws of procreation under which he would be born with that nature? Was it not God? There is no escaping the logical inference in the doctrine of an inherited sinful nature. It is blasphemous and slanderous libel on the character of God.
But one might as well reject the Bible out of hand, if he does not want to recognize that God is the Creator of all men. For the fact that God is the Creator of all men is one of the clearest truths taught in the Bible.
"Your hands have made me and fashioned me" (Psalm 119:73)
"For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well." (Psalm 139:13, 14)
"Have we not all one Father? Has not one God created us?" (Malachi 2:10)
"Know that the LORD, He is God; It is He who has made us, and not we ourselves" (Psalm 100:3)
"Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness...So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him" (Genesis 1:26,27)
"For in the image of God He made man." (Genesis 9:6)
"With it we bless our God and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the similitude of God." (James 3:9)
"Thus says the LORD, who stretches out the heavens, lays the foundation of the earth, and forms the spirit of man within him" (Zechariah 12:1)
"The Spirit of God has made me, And the breath of the Almighty gives me life." (Job 33:4)
"...He gives to all life, breath, and all things." (Acts 17:25)
"'For we are also His offspring.'" (Acts 17:29)
"I am the root and the offspring of David." (Revelation 22:16)
"Truly, this only I have found: That God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes." (Ecclesiastes 7:29)
The last verse in this list not only declares that God has created man, but it also affirms that God created man upright. Now if man is created upright, he cannot be born a sinner; and if he is born a sinner, he cannot be created upright. Either one or the other may be true, but they cannot both be true for the two are contradictory.
But when God says he "created us in his image, and gave us life and breath and all things," are we to understand that he created us as sinners? When he says, "We are his offspring," are we to understand that his offspring are born sinners? When Jesus said, "I am the root and the offspring of David," are we to understand that Jesus, as the offspring of David, was born with a sinful nature? The very fact that Jesus was a man, descended from Adam, and born with a human nature as we are, shows that men are not born with a sinful nature (I John 4:3, 2 John 7, Heb. 2:14, Heb. 2:16-18, Heb. 4:15, Rom. 1:3, Matt. 1:1, Luke 3:38).
THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN
SLANDERS AND LIBELS THE CHARACTER OF GOD
The doctrine of original sin is false. It slanders and libels the character of God, it shocks our God-given consciousness of justice, and it contradicts the plainest teachings of God's Word. The doctrine of original sin is not a Bible doctrine, it is a false doctrine that contradicts the Bible on almost every page. But because good people can quote texts from the Bible that they believe "proves" the doctrine of original sin, they are convinced it is true. But good people have rejected truth and held to error in the name of the Bible before.
For instance, Galileo and Copernicus believed that the earth was not the center of the universe, that the sun did not go around the earth but that the earth went around the sun and that the earth rotated on its axis, giving the illusion that the sun was going around the earth. We all know this to be true today, but did all religious people believe it then? No, both John Calvin and Martin Luther held, along with the Roman Catholic Church, to the error that the earth was the center of the universe, that the sun went around the earth and that the earth stood still. Martin Luther called Copernicus "an upstart astrologer" and a "fool who wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy." Calvin said: "Who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above that of the Holy Spirit? Do not the Scriptures say that Joshua commanded the sun and not the earth to stand still? That the sun runs from one end of the heavens to the other?" Both Calvin and Luther may have been well-meaning men, but they still held to their false views because they could quote Scripture texts to support them. Likewise, there are good, well-meaning people today who also erroneously hold to the doctrine of original sin because they can quote texts from the Bible that they believe "proves" it.
It is these texts, which in my view, have been taken out of context and misinterpreted to support this doctrine, that we will examine in our second article.
FURTHER OBSERVATIONS ABOUT PSALM 51:5
We have already shown that the language in Psalm 51:5 is figurative language. The idea that men can be born sinners is illogical and unreasonable. It is both a physical and a moral impossibility to be born a sinner. It is a moral impossibility because people cannot justly be sinners by birth. That people can be sinners and guilty and condemned at birth is morally unthinkable.
It is a physical impossibility to be born a sinner because of the nature of sin. Sin is not a substance. It has no physical properties and cannot possibly be passed on physically from one person to another. We know this because the Bible defines sin. It defines it in 1 John 3:4 where John wrote by inspiration, "Sin is the transgression of the law" (KJV). According to the Bible, sin is an act or a choice that a human being makes to transgress the law of God. It cannot, therefore, be a substance because choice and substance are contradictions. Is a wicked act a substance? Is disobedience, transgressions, lawbreaking, or unrighteousness a substance? Is guilt a substance? No, they are all moral concepts or moral qualities. It is impossible for them to be transmitted physically. When we speak of sin, we are describing the character of an act. The word sin describes the character of an act as being wicked or wrong. Sin is no more a substance than friendliness, goodness, or virtue are substances. If sin is a substance that can be transmitted physically, then virtue also must be a substance that can be transmitted physically. What would be the result if all this were true? Wouldn't sinners beget sinners, and saints beget saints!
Sin is not a substance, and we all know that it is not. Yet religious leaders and others still maintain the impossible teaching that sin, like some malignant disease, has been passed on physically from Adam to all his descendants. How ridiculous it is to make sin a physical virus, instead of a voluntary and responsible choice. How foolish to speak of men being born sinners! Moral character, whether holiness or sinfulness, cannot be passed on physically. It is pure superstition to believe that it can be.
Then what did David mean by the expression, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me."? He was using this figure of himself conceived and formed in his mother's womb as the embodiment of iniquity and sin to express, in strong symbolic language, his present sinful and guilty condition before God. This is David's Psalm of repentance. He is deeply humbled and penitent for the sins he has committed, and he uses this strong language to confess his wickedness and guilt. But if David wanted God to understand his language to mean that he was a sinner by birth, the whole spirit of the Psalm is contradicted and changed. It is no longer a Psalm of repentance of sin, but it is turned into a Psalm of excuse for sin. For what better excuse could David make for his sins than the excuse that he was born a sinner? But these are not the words of a man making excuses for his sins. These are the words of a man humbled and deeply penitent for having sinned against God.
To interpret this text literally violates two fundamental rules of sound Biblical interpretation: First: a text must not be interpreted in such a way as to contradict the clear teachings of the Bible in other passages. The Bible is the word of God. It is without error or contradiction, and so it is only reasonable to realize that each passage maintains a unity, harmony, and agreement with every other passage. God is not the God of confusion and contradiction. There is unity and agreement throughout his Word. But we have already pointed out that a literal interpretation of Psalm 51:5 is completely inconsistent with its context, because it amounts to David making an excuse for his sins in a Psalm which is a confession of guilt for his sins. The whole character and spirit of the Psalm is contradicted and changed by giving verse five a literal meaning. A literal interpretation is also inconsistent with the figurative and symbolic language used throughout this Psalm.
To arbitrarily give a literal meaning to this one verse, without giving a literal meaning to the other symbolic expressions in this Psalm shows an inconsistency in interpretation that can only be explained by a dogmatic belief in the doctrine of original sin. A literal interpretation of Psalm 51:5 is also inconsistent with numerous passages and teachings throughout the Bible. As we have pointed out, it makes God the Creator of sinners, because the Bible clearly teaches that God is our Creator, that he forms us in our mother's womb, and that he gives us life, breath, and all things. It directly contradicts the Scriptures that teach that God has created us upright and in his own image. And it makes Jesus a sinner, for the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus took upon himself human nature and became a man (Hebrews 2:11, 14, 16-18; 4:15).
Second: A text must not be interpreted in such a way as to contradict reality. We should forever remember that the Bible does not teach nonsense. It does not teach that God breaks our bones when we sin, or that broken bones literally rejoice (Psalm 51:8). It does not teach that our sins are literally purged with hyssop (Psalm 51:7). It does not teach that babies literally speak and tell lies as soon as they are born (Psalm 58:3). It does not teach that men literally go back into their mother's wombs (Job 1:21). I does not teach that the substance of unborn babies is literally sinful (Psalm 51:5). These are all figurative expressions. To interpret them in their literal sense is to teach nonsense and what every person knows to be impossible and contrary to reality.
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR PEOPLE TO BE BORN SINNERS
The nature of sin, the nature of justice, and the nature of God are such that it is impossible for men to be born sinners.
First, sin is voluntary. Is it a sin to be born with blue eyes, black hair, a small nose, or large ears? Is it a sin to be born short or tall? Is it a sin to be born at all? No, because we have no choice in the matter of our birth. Our birth, and everything we are and have at birth, is ours completely involuntarily.
Second, sin is not a substance. It has absolutely no material or physical properties. Sin is an act, and so it is impossible for it to be passed on physically.
Third, sin is a responsible choice. Newborn babies are not responsible. They do not know the difference between right and wrong, and so cannot be responsible. A child has no moral character at birth. Moral character can only belong to a child when he has come to know the difference between right and wrong. A child must first reach the "age of accountability" before he can sin. Isaiah wrote, "For before the Child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that you dread will be forsaken by both her kings" (Isaiah 7:16). Deuteronomy 1:39 says, "Moreover your little ones and your children, who you say will be victims, who today have no knowledge of good and evil, they shall go in there; to them I will give it, and they shall possess it." Friends, children do not know right from wrong at birth. They do not know to refuse the evil and choose the good. They have no knowledge of good and evil. Thus, they cannot be held responsible for sin.
Fourth, sin is personal and non-transferable. No person can sin for, or be made guilty of, the sin of another person. Moral character, guilt, and accountability are non-transferable. Ezekiel wrote in Ezekiel 18:20, :"The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself." Deuteronomy. 24:16 says, "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall the children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin."
GOD'S JUSTICE MAKES IT MORALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO BE BORN A SINNER
Is it possible that the infinitely just God could cause men to be born sinners and condemn them to hell for the sin of Adam? Can the perfect justice of God permit him to charge guilt to the innocent or punish the innocent for the guilt of another? Is it really possible that innocent little babies open their eyes in this world under the wrath of God and that they are condemned to the torments of hell for the sin of Adam? Such an idea goes against reason and revelation. Yet, this is the incredible teaching that people expect us to accept and to believe.
This doctrine represents God as the most cruel and unreasonable being in the universe. It represents him as condemning and sending men to hell for a nature which they received without their knowledge or consent, and with which He created them. According to this doctrine, millions of babies have been born into this world with a sinful nature; they are sinners necessarily because of the nature with which they were born, and then they have died and will be lost without a chance to be saved. What a blasphemous slander this doctrine is upon the character and justice of God!
CONCLUSION
Let me close this lesson with the words we opened it with from 1 Peter 4:11. "If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God." Does the Bible support what you believe about the doctrine of original sin? Will you not closely examine this doctrine in light of the teaching of the Bible? If you find after this examination that it does not teach what you believe, are you willing to change your belief to conform with the Bible's teaching? We cannot please God with any other attitude.
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 11:21 AM
Ella,
Sweet Lord�did you Read that whole thing? Again�I must Bring up � whom would you Rather Believe � this Long Winded Man�or�The Writers of The New Testament?
The Authors of The New Testament WERE in The Church! If Christians had a Problem with the Interpretation (Whether Figurative or not) of what they Wrote�then they would Ask them and it would be CLEARED UP.
Also�The Church had The Full Deposit of Faith � Given to Her By Christ � and She is The Final Arbitrator of Scriptures Interpretation. If left up to man�we would have Quite a Bit of Confusion.
Original Sin has been a Doctrine of The Christian Faith since �Forever�. It was only after The Rebellion that it was changed by other churches.
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 01:36 PM
So, is salvation by grace fith and works? This must be true if you think that man is born with original sin, which the Bible does not tell us these things if you sit and read Romans chapter 5, chapter 6, and chapter 7... if man is born with sin, then this would mean that God is responsible for man's sins, and not man.
If you were baptized as a baby for the forgiveness of your sisn, why have you continued to sin? And PLEEEEEWWWEEASSS dont' you dare say you have not sinned, or that you have no sins, and that you DO NTO SIN!
The Bible tells us that God does not make us responsible for Adam's sin, but that he have the sin nature and capablilityt of sinning.
How can you baptise a babuy for sins they have not committed, does this prevent them from sinning later on in life? If so, what your and all other's problems for sinning.
BTW, again, I ask you are you a Catholic/Calvinists, becaseu this too, is a false teaching of Calvin's which was started by Agustine and has crept into the church since the 5th century, that Augustine taught out of ignorance.
There is not much to say about this false teaching, becsue God's word speaks for its self and there is no where in scripture that teaches such false doctrine. Again if we had original sin then this would mean Jesus should have been baptized as an infant since his mother was Mary.
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 02:39 PM
Ella,
Baptism does not Prevent you from Sinning! Baptism �Washes Away� any Sin that you may have�whether at Birth or at an Older age. It also Makes you a New Creature�able to Respond to God�s Word.
I will state my Point Again�Whom would you Rather believe�this person�or what The Church has Taught for 2,000 Years?
If this is Apostacy (as some claim)�why did it take over 1,500 years for it to be Confronted? Can you Answer that?
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 02:44 PM
Ella,
You must have not given those last two sentences too much Thought.
(Your Words) There is not much to say about this false teaching, becsue God's word speaks for its self and there is no where in scripture that teaches such false doctrine.
Again if we had original sin then this would mean Jesus should have been baptized as an infant since his mother was Mary. (End)
John The Baptist Prepared The Way for Christ. It was Christ's Sacrifice on The Cross that Atoned for Our Sins...which makes it possible for
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 04:59 PM
Arch said: Baptism does not Prevent you from Sinning! Baptism “Washes Away” any Sin that you may have…whether at Birth or at an Older age. It also Makes you a New Creature…able to Respond to God’s Word.
Ella syas: This is foolishness! And where in God's word do you find scripture to support this? Baptism washes away your sins that you MAY committe or have at birth an when you get older? What a lie of the devil!
Arch, did you even read the "long winded article"? If no, you would do well if you read it from beginning to end, and then read the chapters I gave to you.
This is why people are feed lies and get caught up in false doctriens, they don't take time to read what God says about a matter instead they depend on what man has said 1,0000 of years ago, and you never read to know God for yourself.
After you have read the chapters I gave to you and the article in it completion then we can talk.
Otheriwse, I pray God Himsef will open your understanding and enlighten you into the truth of His word.
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 05:16 PM
Original sin is what the Bible teaches.
The article posted for this thread is just lame.
He uses ONE verse of Scripture that Christians have always believed teaches Original sin, and then IGNORES the rest.
I don't think he is right about this at all.
The Bible plainly teaches that the sin of Adam and Eve, were IMPUTED to all mankind. That all mankind is born spiritually DEAD with a will enslaved to sin.
You don't think the Sin of Adam and Eve, and their sinful natures effected us????
"Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (Ps. 51:5)
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 05:16 PM
Original sin is what the Bible teaches.
The article posted for this thread is just lame.
He uses ONE verse of Scripture that Christians have always believed teaches Original sin, and then IGNORES the rest.
I don't think he is right about this at all.
The Bible plainly teaches that the sin of Adam and Eve, were IMPUTED to all mankind. That all mankind is born spiritually DEAD with a will enslaved to sin.
You don't think the Sin of Adam and Eve, and their sinful natures effected us????
"Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (Ps. 51:5)
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 05:42 PM
What is the biblical evidence for the imputation of Adam's Sin?
January 23, 2006 | by Matt Perman | Topic: Imputed & Original Sin
Subscribe to...
The doctrine of the imputation of Adam's sin means that when Adam first sinned, that sin (and its blame) was rightly regarded by God to be our sin as well. John Piper writes:
The problem with the human race is not most deeply that everybody does various kinds of sins�those sins are real, they are huge and they are enough to condemn us. Paul is very concerned about them. But the deepest problem is that behind all our depravity and all our guilt and all our sinning, there is a deep mysterious connection with Adam whose sin became our sin and whose judgment became our judgment. (John Piper, "Adam, Christ, and Justification: Part 1")
God ordains that that there be a union of some kind that makes Adam's sin to be our sin so that our condemnation is just. ("Adam, Christ, and Justification: Part 5")
The biblical basis for this doctrine of imputed sin is discussed thoroughly in John Piper's five sermons on Romans 5:12-21. Here we will simply seek to summarize some of the primary evidence from this text.
Sin Entered the World Through One Man
First, Paul states in 5:12 that all sinned in Adam: "Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned." Paul seems to be equating the "because all sinned" with "through one man sin entered into the world."
Sin is Not Imputed Where There is no Law
Second, in verses 13-14 Paul adds a clarification which confirms that he does indeed have the imputation of Adam's sin in view in the phrase "because all sinned" rather than our individual sins. He states: "For until the Law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come." In other words, Paul concedes that personal sin was prevalent in the world before Moses ("until the Law sin was in the world..."). But he adds that these personal sins were not the ultimate reason people died in that time period: "But sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses." As Piper summarizes:
People died even though their own individual sins against the Mosaic law were not the reason for dying; they weren't counted. Instead, the reason all died is because all sinned in Adam. Adam's sin was imputed to them. (John Piper, "Adam, Christ, and Justification: Part 2")
Death Reigned Even Over Those Who Did Not Sin Like Adam
Third, Paul's statement at the end of verse 14 further clarifies that he does not have personal sins in view as the reason for human death: "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam until Moses, even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam." Piper notes:
In other words, yes Paul concedes that there are other kinds of laws before the Mosaic Law, and yes people broke those laws, and yes, one could argue that these sins are the root cause of death and condemnation in the world. But, Paul says, there is a problem with that view, because death reigned "even over those who had not sinned in the likeness of the offense of Adam." There are those who died without seeing a law and choosing to sin against it.
Who are they? I think the group of people begging for an explanation is infants. Infants died. They could not understand personal revelation. They could not read the law on their hearts and choose to obey or disobey it. Yet they died. Why? Paul answers: the sin of Adam and the imputation of that sin to the human race. In other words, death reigned over all humans, even over those who did not sin against a known and understood law. Therefore, the conclusion is, to use the words of verse 18: "through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men." (Ibid)
So the purpose of verses 13 and 14 are to clarify verse 12 in this way:
At the end of verse 12 the words, "death spread to all men, because all sinned" mean that "death spread to all because all sinned in Adam." Death is not first and most deeply because of our own individual sinning, but because of what happened in Adam. (Ibid)
Paul's Emphasis Upon the One Transgression
Fourth, at least five times in the following verses Paul says that death comes upon all humans because of the one sin of Adam:
Verse 15: by the transgression of the one the many died
Verse 16: the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation
Verse 17: by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one
Verse 18: through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men
We are all condemned not ultimately because of our individual sins, but because of one sin (verse 18). We die not ultimately because of personal sins, but because of Adam's one transgression (verse 17). It is not ultimately from our personal sins that we die, but rather "by the transgression of the one the many died." Paul states over and over again that it is because of one sin that death and condemnation belong to us all. In other words, we are connected to Adam such that his one sin is regarded as our sin and we are worthy of condemnation for it.
The Direct Statement of Verse 19
Fifth, verse 19 provides us with a direct statement of imputation:
For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
Paul here says that we are made sinners by the sin of Adam. Due to his disobedience, we are regarded as sinners. We cannot take "made sinners" here to be referring to original sin in which we become inherently sinful because it is paralleled with "made righteous." The phrase "made righteous" in this context is referring to the great truth of justification. Justification does not concern a change in our characters, the infusion of something inherent in us. Rather, it involves a change in our standing before God. In justification, God declares us righteous because He imputes to us the righteousness of Christ--not because He makes us internally righteous (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:21). Thus, when Paul says "made righteous" here, he means "imputed with righteousness" not "infused with righteousness." Since "made sinners" is paralleled with "made righteous," it must also be referring to imputation. Thus, Paul is saying that we are all made sinners in the sense that we are imputed with Adam's sin.
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 09:02 PM
James said: Original sin is what the Bible teaches.
Ella says: Sorry James but there is no such teaching in the Bible. Please point it out to me. Paul in all of his writings have NEVER said not one thing about man being born with Adam's original sins. Have you read for yourself what Paul speaks about or are you only going on a few scriptures from articles of your denominational doctrine and teachings? I think if you would read Romans chapter 5, chapter 6, chapter 7 , and chapter 8 foryourself God will enlighten your understanding. God did NOT charge us with Adam's sin, but because of Adam we have the pre-disposition to sin.
Hear what God has to say: Romans chapter 5:Death Through Adam, Life Through Christ
12.Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned— 13.To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone’s account where there is no law. 14.Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come. 15.But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16 Nor can the gift of God be compared with the result of one man’s sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought ondemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17.For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!
18.Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. 20.The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
This not speaking abot we are responsible for Adam's sin, but we have the sin nature of Adam TO SIN. Death is the sin that we inherited becasue of Adam, God DID NOT CHARGE us with Adm's sin or make us responsible for a sin we did not commit, but the SIN NATURE of Adam was charged t us because Adam was the father of the human race. So we have a nature TO SIN. As I have explaed, a person with both parents who have diabetes, does not mean the children will have diabetes, but there is a pre-disposition (possibility) the children will have diabetes.
James said: posted for this thread is just lame.
Ella says: Sure its lame to you because it disagrees with the false teachings of Calvin and Aigustine and all who believe that we are born in sin when we come into the world, but there is no such foolishness in the bible. God says we are created in His image, just as Adam and Eve, innocent without sin (s)... sin is a choice a person makes, but the POSSIBILITES because of our sin nature which we inherited is inborn. Jsut as a person can combat diabetes and does not have to have it with the proper diet. A person can also choose not to sin with a proper spiritual diet of keeping their mind stayed on Jesus.
James said: verse of Scripture that Christians have always believed teaches Original sin, and then IGNORES the rest.
Ella say: James, Its obvious you DID NOT read the whole article, becasue he breaks down Psalm 51 and provides other passages as well. Have you ever read Ezekiel chapter 18... You do well to do so...
James said: I don't think he is right about this at all.
Ella sya: I'm sure you don't, but again, its becasue it goes against your doctrine which is FALSE! there is no such thing as orginal sin! We choose to sin.
James said:The Bible plainly teaches that the sin of Adam and Eve, were IMPUTED to all mankind. That all mankind is born spiritually DEAD with a will enslaved to sin.
Ella says. No, the Bible DOES NOT plainly teach such. You have serious need to read what God does say. Again, you must understand the meaning of imputation in order to spirituall connect the dots of what God says about imputed Adam's sin to the humand race. Again, God did not charge us with Adam's sin, but we inherited Adam's sin nature TO SIN...
Definition of imputation: charged of a FAULT OR CRIME, OR CHARACTERISTIC. (as I staed we have Adam's sin anture as Paul is speaking about and death, becasue of Adam's sin.
Impute; TO ATTRIBUTE TO ANOTHER; CHARGE WITH ASCRIBE, IN THEOLOGY IT MEANS TO ASCRIBE GOOD OR EVIL TO A PERSON AS COMING FROM ANOTHER PERSON.
jAMES SAID: You don't think the Sin of Adam and Eve, and their sinful natures effected us????
Ella says: Adams sin nature has not one thing to do with a child being born with an original sin. What does a child know about sins... Adam sin effect us becasue we are not born with a sin nature this is why Jesus came to died in our stead, so that we might be set free from sin when we receive Jesus Christ, His death and blood shed on the cross paid our sin debt, otherwise, if you believe in original sin then His death didn't do what God says it did, therefore, not only are we saved by grace and faith, but baptizing a child at birth and to think you have Adam's originals sin debt, means we also must help Jesus in covering our sins, so we must have works? See how foolish this doctrine is, and is contradicting everything God said He did through Jesus Christ. the sin debt is paid, becasue He paid it on the cross, and God then imputes His righteousness on us and we are as we were in the beginning as Adam and Eve sinless! Should be anywayyz, if the person has truly repentented of their sins.
James quotes: at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me" (Ps. 51:5)
Ella says: READ THE article as well as what God says in His word!
I erased a sfew words of your comments by accident, hopefull I got what you said correctly.
The FALSE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN...A MUST READ!!!
Posted : 5 Sep, 2011 09:11 PM
CORRECTION: I meant to say... Adam's sin effect us becasue we are now(instead of not) born with a sin nature this is why Jesus came to died in our stead, so that we might be set free from sin when we receive Jesus Christ, His death and blood shed on the cross paid our sin....
