Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
"To interpret the phrase "made sinners" to mean that men are born sinners and become sinners involuntarily and necessarily by receiving a sinful nature from Adam, is a forced and inconsistent interpretation of this passage; for this passage not only says that all men are "made sinners" because of Adam's transgression, it also says that all men are "made sinners" because of Adam's transgression, it also says that all men are "made righteous" by the obedience of Christ, and that the free gift of life "came upon all men" by Christ Jesus. So, for the advocates of the doctrine of original sin to arbitrarily give to the phrases "made sinners" and "came upon all men" the meaning of physical force and physical necessity when these phrases refer to Adam's sin, without giving the same meaning to them when they they refer to Christ's righteousness, is once again an example of a forced and inconsistent interpretation dictated by a prepossessed belief in the doctrine of original sin."
|
But who said it was a SIN NATURE? That's my issue. To say Adam made us sinners is not to necessarily say he gave us a sin nature. Again, it's position, not activity.
Christ made us righteous. Is that a position or activity?
Christ's work in making us righteous is the polar opposite, and actually more than opposite, to what Adam did according to
Romans 5.
That is not reading anything into it. It is taking it from the writing. how can we read into the picture anything after reading what Adam did is outdone by what Christ did in making us righteous?
Threaded Mode
