Original Sin (or sin nature) in the Bible:

[Bible Highlighter]

If you hate reformed theology then why teach it?

Try Googling the origin of Original Sin some time.
It’s not what you think. But of course you see what you want to see for your own reasons.

There are alot of Baptist's I've taught that say they are not calvinist's. Sad, but all of these folks are confused. They really don't know what they are.

You would think that If a Christian would have taught somebody, they would not be confused. But you are saying that those you have taught are confused. I am not surprised your teaching on this topic leads to confusion. For it does not align with what the Bible says.

Bible Highlighter, I am going to teach you what Deuteronomy 5:9-10 is inferring.
It cannot mean what you believe it to mean. For Ezekiel 18:20 contradicts your interpretation.
btw, you are a King James onlyist correct? Why then quote from the AMP?

First, I love it when people tell me what I believe (As if they are a know it all). In the past, I did hold to the label of “King James Only” but for a long time now I come up with my own label that is more accurate. I am Core-KJB. Meaning, the King James Bible is my core foundation, but that does not mean I cannot read, study, or quote from Modern Bibles if they line up with what the King James Bible is also saying.

Second, Ezekiel 18:20 is dealing with a specific sin that the father does and how the son will not be held accountable for his specific actions of sin. Deuteronomy 5:9-10 is talking about the consequences of sin in that it can have an effect and or influence upon the subsequent generations. A drunken father can have a drunken son. A father who is into Satanism can influence his future generations and incur further wrath from God. Yes, a person can repent and change their ways. But sin has an influence and an effect upon people and men have a sin nature that they need to crucify in Christ. Ezekiel 18:20 is not in reference to Adam being our Federal Head, as well. If you were to read Romans 5, and 1 Corinthians 15 more closely there is a back and forth point being made. At the heart: It is about being dead in Adam, and being alive in Christ. That by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, and by the obedience of one… many will be made righteous. This is Federal Headship and it is not to be confused with general individual sins done.

Three, Adam’s sin spread to others a sin nature. To deny this is to deny loads of Scripture. With a sin nature comes sin.
If you abide in Adam your whole life… you will be dead. This is why people need to switch sides and become alive by receiving Christ and abiding in Him. Yes, a baby is first saved by God’s grace, but his body is destined to die physcially by Adam’s transgression. If there was no sin by Adam and Adam made the right choice, then his descendants should have not faced death because Adam ate of the tree of life (Which would have made him live forever and his descendants). But seeing Adam ate of the wrong tree… Adam and his descendants then faced physical death as the punishment.

All I can do is encourage you to take a look more closely at the points I made with Scripture at the beginning of this thread. If your not interested in doing that and you are only interested in pushing your own agenda, and if that is the case, then we are done talking on this point.

May the LORD JESUS bless you.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

@Titus

Let me ask you this:
If being in Adam is innocence, then do you believe you can be in Adam and also be righteous without being in Christ?

Romans 5 and 1 Corinthians 15 makes the parallel between being in either Adam or Christ.
I choose to abide in Christ and His good ways.

Adam brings death. Christ brings life.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

I have two legs. Birds have two legs. Therefore, according to you, I am a bird. Reductio ad absurdum.

Infants and those born with severe mental disabilities -- neither one is equivalent to Jesus Christ, who is God.

Jesus Christ had no sin nature, therefore He didn't succumb to sin. Every other person has a sin nature, since we are descended from Adam.

You're distorting the meaning by taking verse 14 out of context.

Romans 5:12-17, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died through the one man’s trespass, much more surely have the grace of God and the gift in the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abounded for the many. And the gift is not like the effect of the one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the gift following many trespasses brings justification. If, because of the one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one, much more surely will those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ." That's plain enough, isn't it?

You post: If, because of the one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one


If this means that all are born sinners unconditionally then what about the second half of the verse that says "much more surely will those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ" which you did not underline?????

You are still not being consistent with your wrong interpretation of the verse. If the first part proves all are unconditionally made sinners due to one man Adam's transgression, the the second part must mean that all are made righteous due to one Christ's righteousness.

The second half of verse 18 and 19 exposes the erroneous, inconsistent interpretation being placed upon the first half. You want the first half to include all universally but the second half to include only some. Obviuosly a BIASED interpretation, nothing more.

 

[Ernest T. Bass]

Think it about like this:

If Adam did not eat the wrong tree, and he ate only the good tree (Which would have given him eternal life), he would have been immortal and his descendants would have been immortal. But seeing Adam ate of the tree that brought death, even the majority of most of his descendants would see death as a result of this choice.

Side Note:

Now, you may protest and say that maybe if Adam ate only of the good tree and lived eternally only applied to Adam and not his descendants. They would have to eat of the tree of life, too. But I don’t believe that would be the case. Why? Well, Adam’s descendants did not have to keep eating of the wrong tree in order to have the knowledge of good and evil, though. So it seems that eating of a particular tree had a generational result or effect.

We can deal in hypothesis onlu what happened. What happened was Adam was created with a free will and given a law.

Accoding to the BIble for a person to be a sinner a law must exist (Rom 4:15) and that law must be transgressed (1 Jn 3:4). Therefore men choose to beak God's law BECOMING a sinner. Nowhere does the Bible ever define sinnig according to OS, NOWHERE.

If we add Rom 7:8-9 we see not just anyone can sin, only those who are accountable to God can sin. Paul points out there was a time in his life when he was without law meaning sin had no power over him. But as he imtellectually matured sin came alive in him, sin was not there at birth but sprang up later in his life. Paul said he was ALIVE then later DIED speaking of his spiritual state, If OS were true then he would have been born dead and remained dead until, he became a born again Christian. Yet he was boen alive without sin but later DIED when sin sprang up in him.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

We can deal in hypothesis onlu what happened. What happened was Adam was created with a free will and given a law.

Accoding to the BIble for a person to be a sinner a law must exist (Rom 4:15) and that law must be transgressed (1 Jn 3:4). Therefore men choose to beak God's law BECOMING a sinner. Nowhere does the Bible ever define sinnig according to OS, NOWHERE.

If we add Rom 7:8-9 we see not just anyone can sin, only those who are accountable to God can sin. Paul points out there was a time in his life when he was without law meaning sin had no power over him. But as he imtellectually matured sin came alive in him, sin was not there at birth but sprang up later in his life. Paul said he was ALIVE then later DIED speaking of his spiritual state, If OS were true then he would have been born dead and remained dead until, he became a born again Christian. Yet he was boen alive without sin but later DIED when sin sprang up in him.

Uh, the Bible says that in Adam all die (1 Corinthians 15:22). Why are they dying in Adam? Because Adam brought sin upon them. In Adam there is no life. Yet, you appear to be saying otherwise.

Romans 5:19 says:
“For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,…”

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Jeremiah 17:9 - The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Ephesians 2:3 “…were by nature children of wrath,…”

 

[Illuminator]

Adam didn't break a law, he broke a covenant.

 

[Titus]

Ephesians 2:3 “…were by nature children of wrath,…”

Bible Highlighter, verses taken out of context and interpreted is a pretext.

 

[Titus]

Adam didn't break a law, he broke a covenant.

Covenant has written laws. A covenant is a lawfully binding contract between two parties.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Bible Highlighter, verses taken out of context and interpreted is a pretext.

But your not really showing how my quote of these words from Ephesians 2:3 is being taken out of context. I just see it talking about our former life before coming to Christ. This means that we were by nature… children of wrath. That’s what it means.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Romans 5:19 says:
“For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners,…”

So if Adam did not have an influence upon men to sin, then why does this above verse say that by one’s man’s disobedience many were made sinners? How can one man’s disobedience make many sinners if Adam had nothing to do with his descendants sinning?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

How can the heart be desperately wicked if we are innocent to begin with or if our heart is inherently good to begin with?

 

[Titus]

But your not really showing how my quote of these words from Ephesians 2:3 is being taken out of context. I just see it talking about our former life before coming to Christ. This means that we were by nature… children of wrath. That’s what it means.

Ephesians 2:3 HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPLAINED BY MYSELF!!! Either you're not reading all of my posts on this thread or you just ignored them.

Some are by nature children of wrath. I know this is true because the Bible says it is true.(btw, that is not circular reasoning).

But as I have all ready taught, we must know what this Greek word nature means.
It can mean by being born that way, genetic traits.

But what calvinism KEEPS COMPLETELY SILENT ABOUT, is this word nature also can mean,
By habitual practise; habitual habit.

Town drunk Otis, on the TV show Andy Griffith.
Otis walks by locals drunk.
One local says, Otis is all liquored up again".
Another local responds, " Well you know that's just His nature".

Does he mean,
1) Otis was born a drunk by his fathers inherited genes?
2) Otis' habitual habit?

The wicked in the bible have a wicked nature to commit sin because they repeatedly CHOOSE to practise sin. So by their nature they are wicked. It has become them by habit.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Ephesians 2:3 HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPLAINED BY MYSELF!!! Either you're not reading all of my posts on this thread or you just ignored them.

Why would you assume that I would read the entire thread?
Do you think I hang on every word you say as if it was gold?
In either case, if you did explain it already, then please feel free to provide the post #.

Some are by nature children of wrath. I know this is true because the Bible says it is true.(btw, that is not circular reasoning).

But as I have all ready taught, we must know what this Greek word nature means.
It can mean by being born that way, genetic traits.

But what calvinism KEEPS COMPLETELY SILENT ABOUT, is this word nature also can mean,
By habitual practise; habitual habit.

Yes, the Collins Dictionary does support that interpretation.

Nature definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Nature definition: Nature is all the animals, plants, and other things in the world that are not made by... | Meaning, pronunciation, translations and examples

www.collinsdictionary.com

But if the apostle Paul was saying it was just some people were by nature in the sense that they merely exercised their sinful nature while others have not, then are you saying that there are unbelievers out there who are not sinful and who are not naturally inclined to doing wrong things? If that is the case, then where does Paul allude to such a thing?

Town drunk Otis, on the TV show Andy Griffith.
Otis walks by locals drunk.
One local says, Otis is all liquored up again".
Another local responds, " Well you know that's just His nature".

Does he mean,
1) Otis was born a drunk by his fathers inherited genes?
2) Otis' habitual habit?

Generally people understand the word nature in that it is a part of who a person is by their genetics.
Yes, in rare cases it can be based on one's character traits that they have chosen to develop, but this meaning is generally not understood by most. You say the word nature to people and it is commonly understood as a part of one's genetic disposition or as a part of the natural order of creation.

The wicked in the bible have a wicked nature to commit sin because they repeatedly CHOOSE to practise sin. So by their nature they are wicked. It has become them by habit.

I don't buy that odd interpretation because it simply does not fit the context and the rest of the Bible. Paul did not say that everyone was by habitual practice children of wrath. Paul did not describe how there was another group of innocent unbelievers who are not children of wrath in context. That AND... there are other verses that say a similar thing. For example: Jeremiah says, the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked and who can know it? This again is saying that mankind is corrupted (which is unbiblical to suggest otherwise).

 

[Titus]

Why would you assume that I would read the entire thread?
Do you think I hang on every word you say as if it was gold?
In either case, if you did explain it already, then please feel free to provide the post #.


Yes, the Collins Dictionary does support that interpretation.

Nature definition and meaning | Collins English Dictionary

Nature definition: Nature is all the animals, plants, and other things in the world that are not made by... | Meaning, pronunciation, translations and examples

www.collinsdictionary.com

But if the apostle Paul was saying it was just some people were by nature in the sense that they merely exercised their sinful nature while others have not, then are you saying that there are unbelievers out there who are not sinful and who are not naturally inclined to doing wrong things? If that is the case, then where does Paul allude to such a thing?



Generally people understand the word nature in that it is a part of who a person is by their genetics.
Yes, in rare cases it can be based on one's character traits that they have chosen to develop, but this meaning is generally not understood by most. You say the word nature to people and it is commonly understood as a part of one's genetic disposition or as a part of the natural order of creation.


I don't buy that odd interpretation because it simply does not fit the context and the rest of the Bible. Paul did not say that everyone was by habitual practice children of wrath. Paul did not describe how there was another group of innocent unbelievers who are not children of wrath in context. That AND... there are other verses that say a similar thing. For example: Jeremiah says, the heart is deceitful and desperately wicked and who can know it? This again is saying that mankind is corrupted (which is unbiblical to suggest otherwise).

It absolutely fits the context. Calvinism what you are believing in and promoting whether you admit it or not, never fits in any context. Not one letter in the TULIP is Biblical.

Since Adam had no imaginary sin nature when he commited sin. Explain why Adam sinned?
Then you will understand that is why, and how all of mankind sin. No need for a sin nature to commit sin! JUST ASK ADAM!!!

 

[face2face]

Since Adam had no imaginary sin nature when he commited sin. Explain why Adam sinned?
Then you will understand that is why, and how all of mankind sin. No need for a sin nature to commit sin! JUST ASK ADAM!!!

Paul settles this rather easily when he said "the first man was of the dust of the earth" in other words, his nature was corruptible from the beginning and had the propensity to sin. His mind wasn't infected when his conscience was defiled...but that has nothing to do with his nature which was always of the earth, earthy! Adam could never be immortalized in that earthy nature so the argument is mute and pointless.
F2F

 

[Titus]

Paul settles this rather easily when he said "the first man was of the dust of the earth" in other words, his nature was corruptible from the beginning and had the propensity to sin. His mind wasn't infected when his conscience was defiled...but that has nothing to do with his nature which was always of the earth, earthy! Adam could never be immortalized in that earthy nature so the argument is mute and pointless.
F2F

No scripture. You have contradicted the Bible,
Adam's nature defined by Moses,
Genesis 1:26
-Then God said, Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness...

Genesis 1:27,
-So God created man in His own image: in the image of God He created him; Male and female He created them.

More examples of mans nature.
Ezekial 28:15,
-You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till inquity was found in you.

Ecclesiastes 7:29,
-Truly this only have I found: That God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.

settles this rather easily when he said "the first man was of the dust of the earth

What does that have to do with Adam's nature? If your implying that because Adam was created from the elements of the material world, then you are wrong. That thinking that the materia physicall world is corrupt, tainted comes from Gnosticism not the Bible.

Genesis 1:31,
-Then God saw  everything that He made and indeed it was very  good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Adam could never be immortalized in that earthy nature

What do you mean by an earthly nature? You mean the physical world is corrupt, dirty?
If so you are believing in Gnosticism not Bible. The bible says mankinds nature was created to do good,

Ephesians 2:10,
-For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

Ecclesiastes 7:29 Man created upright. This Hebrew word upright means righteous.
Man is created righteous. There is no corruption in righteous. Righteous also means just.
Man is created just, upright, righteous. Corruption comes when we choose to sin. It is not our inborn nature to be sinful. If it is, then all Christians will desire is to sin. All babies will desire is to disobey their parents and do evil continuously. Inborn sin nature is unbiblical. One selfless act by any unbeliever on earth proves our nature is not inherently wicked. Adam sinned because of freewill. That's the reason all of us sin, freewill. I can just as strongly resist temptation by the devil to sin as I can give myself over to the devil's temptations and sin. We as man can hate sin just as much as we can love sin. Freewill choice.

King David,
Psalm 119:104,
-Through your precepts I get understanding; Therefore I  hate every false way.

 

[face2face]

Since Adam had no imaginary sin nature when he commited sin. Explain why Adam sinned?
Then you will understand that is why, and how all of mankind sin. No need for a sin nature to commit sin! JUST ASK ADAM!!!

Paul settles this rather easily when he said "the first man was of the dust of the earth" in other words his nature was corruptible from the beginning and had a nature which had the propensity to sin. His mind wasn't infected until his conscience was defiled...but that has nothing to do with his nature which was always of the earth. Adam could never be immortalized in that earthy nature so the argument is mute and pointless.
F2F

No scripture. You have contradicted the Bible,
Adam's nature defined by Moses,
Genesis 1:26
-Then God said, Let us make man in our image, according to our likeness...

Correct, in moral capacity this is true....but not in his nature! Temptation to sin comes from flesh nature!

Genesis 1:27,
-So God created man in His own image: in the image of God He created him; Male and female He created them.

More examples of mans nature.
Ezekial 28:15,
-You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created, till inquity was found in you.

28:15 You were blameless in your behavior from the day you were created, until sin was discovered in you.

True - blameless... speaking to the King of Tyre (not sure why you used that reference?) the King held a privileged position with God and Israel until he became proud.

Ecclesiastes 7:29,
-Truly this only have I found: That God made man upright, but they have sought out many schemes.

Correct - man is a standing creature with the capacity to morally discern God's Words.

What does that have to do with Adam's nature? If your implying that because Adam was created from the elements of the material world, then you are wrong. That thinking that the materia physicall world is corrupt, tainted comes from Gnosticism not the Bible.

Genesis 1:31,
-Then God saw  everything that He made and indeed it was very  good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

"Very good" simply relates to the state of His creation - not perfect! It was pleasing for Him to see the work of His Hands. If you are trying to force some meaning on Adams nature as being pure or perfect - this would be a failure on your part.

What do you mean by an earthly nature? You mean the physical world is corrupt, dirty?
If so you are believing in Gnosticism not Bible. The bible says mankinds nature was created to do good,

Ephesians 2:10,
-For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

This is the Spiritual Mind being developed in us. "There is no good thing in human nature"...it has a mind of its own and from it men are defiled - reason for Christ being crucified was to crucify the flesh and its lusts.

Galatians 5:24-26 – Keeping in step with the Spirit. And those who are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking one another, envying one another.

Ecclesiastes 7:29 Man created upright. This Hebrew word upright means righteous.
Man is created righteous. There is no corruption in righteous. Righteous also means just.
Man is created just, upright, righteous. Corruption comes when we choose to sin. It is not our inborn nature to be sinful. If it is, then all Christians will desire is to sin. All babies will desire is to disobey their parents and do evil continuously. Inborn sin nature is unbiblical. One selfless act by any unbeliever on earth proves our nature is not inherently wicked. Adam sinned because of freewill. That's the reason all of us sin, freewill. I can just as strongly resist temptation by the devil to sin as I can give myself over to the devil's temptations and sin. We as man can hate sin just as much as we can love sin. Freewill choice.

King David,
Psalm 119:104,
-Through your precepts I get understanding; Therefore I  hate every false way.

Correct - man was created for the purpose of being a righteous being, but this does not relate to the flesh nature...."Let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus!"

Try again if you like.

F2F

 

[face2face]

No scripture. You have contradicted the Bible,

You couldn't discern Paul's teaching in my response?

The first man was of the dust of the earth; the second man is of heaven. 1 Corinthians 15:47

Paul knew his nature was corruptible from the beginning.

F2F