Why are the Methodist Articles of Faith still written in 18th Century Language

[Bob]

Here, for example, is Article VII—

ARTICLE VII — OF ORIGINAL OR BIRTH SIN​

“Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually.”

The exact meaning is obscure: translation please?

Blessings.

 

[shepherdsword]

"Why are the Methodist Articles of Faith still written in 18th Century Language?"

I am not sure...but since I read a bible that uses English from 1769 I don't see too much of a problem...lol
Seriously, I am in my 60s and still use the good ole KJV.

 

[Bob]

"Why are the Methodist Articles of Faith still written in 18th Century Language?"

I am not sure...but since I read a bible that uses English from 1769 I don't see too much of a problem...lol
Seriously, I am in my 60s and still use the good ole KJV.

Thank you!

So, can you provide a 21st century translation of Article VII? (I understand, sort of, all the words, but the intent? Is it just an archaic restatement of Original Sin, or is there more, or less?)


Peace.

 

[shepherdsword]

Thank you!

So, can you provide a 21st century translation of Article VII? (I understand, sort of, all the words, but the intent? Is it just an archaic restatement of Original Sin, or is there more, or less?)


Peace.

Does this work for you?
The Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church — 2016

 

[Bob]

Does this work for you?
The Articles of Religion of the Methodist Church The Book of Discipline of The United Methodist Church — 2016

Thanks, but all you did is link the page on which the above is printed.

 

[shepherdsword]

Thanks, but all you did is link the page on which the above is printed.

Apologies....it's just an acknowledgment of original sin and stands in opposition to Pelagius who denied it.