Original Sin/Ancestral Sin

[oracle]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

No He was not! However dying through a judgment and being cast into an eternal lake of fire is quite different.

Then why would God condemn someone who is innocent to death? That doesn't make sense. Think about that. This discussion is deep. Nothing is hidden from the eyes of God, He knows what we will do before we even make a move. This is how God can call Israel a transgressor from the womb!

(Isaiah 48:8) Yea, thou heardest not; yea, thou knewest not; yea, from that time that thine ear was not opened: for I KNEW THAT THOU WOULDEST DEAL VERY TREACHEROUSLY, and WAST CALLED A TRANSGRESSOR FROM THE WOMB.

[Hoovie]

Since "faith" is a gift of God and not contrived of men, why is it surprising if God "gifts" faith to innocent children?

[Adino]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

I haven't read the article yet.

The Reclaiming the Mind site is probably my favorite site on the internet at the moment. I've gone through their Trinitarian, Theology, Hermeneutics and Bibliography classes and I'm finishing up with Humanity and Sin soon. But I became annoyed with their discussion on Transducianism and Creationist view of the origin of the soul and now they are getting into free will (they are Calvinists) so...I've taken a couple weeks off to go back with a fresh mind.

The blog on that site, Parchment and Pen, has some good stuff too. But you have to take the good and leave the bad.

I've yet to see a Calvinist consider the Jewish concept of an innate yetzer hatov (good impulse) and yetzer hara (evil impulse).

You've mentioned earlier in this thread about man coming to a knowledge of good and evil. This approach makes the knowledge of good and evil something learned through experience and/or experiment. I believe there is something more to man's 'knowledge of good and evil' than that knowledge he is able to gather experimentally. I see evidence that it is an innate knowledge. I think there is something to be learned from the Jewish idea of yetzer hatov and yetzer hara.

The Jewish concept of yetzer hatov and yetzer hara says the good inclination (yetzer hatov) is an internal impulse toward observance of and/or obedience to the word of God, while the evil inclination (yetzer hara) is an internal rebellion antagonistic to (shall I even say 'at enmity against') the good word of God. The two factors exist in each of us from birth and are only brought to light as experience gives opportunity. Our condition of depravity (the inability to follow after that which is good) becomes more and more apparent as we are introduced to good (God's word) and evil (anything adversarial to God's word).

I think Paul refers to this struggle of inclinations when he mentions not being able to do that which he would and doing that which he would not in Romans 7. While man is capable of recognizing good through intellect, reason and the yetzer hatov (I don't think a Calvinist would allow for this) there is no natural ability to follow after it as there is a natural ability to follow after evil. It is this natural ability to follow after evil I see as the 'sinful nature.' An unnatural ability to follow after that which is good, I believe, comes through a regenerative work of God.

Christ said there is none good but God (Matthew 19:17; Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19). Since we are not God, we are not naturally good. We are naturally adversarial to God and his word, meaning we are naturally sinful and/or evil. The heart must be born again in order to do that which is good. The good God must come to dwell in our hearts in order to cause us to walk in his ways and to overcome the sinful nature (Ezekiel 36:27).

Whether we accept the idea of an imputed sin of Adam or not there is an innate sinfulness within us which exists in constant rebellion against God. We need to be cleansed of this constant rebellion. Thus our justification deals not only with those sins we've personally committed but with this nature of rebellion as well.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Adino

I've yet to see a Calvinist consider the Jewish concept of an innate yetzer hatov (good impulse) and yetzer hara (evil impulse).

You've mentioned earlier in this thread about man coming to a knowledge of good and evil. This approach makes the knowledge of good and evil something learned through experience and/or experiment. I believe there is something more to man's 'knowledge of good and evil' than that knowledge he is able to gather experimentally. I see evidence that it is an innate knowledge. I think there is something to be learned from the Jewish idea of yetzer hatov and yetzer hara.

The Jewish concept of yetzer hatov and yetzer hara says the good inclination (yetzer hatov) is an internal impulse toward observance of and/or obedience to the word of God, while the evil inclination (yetzer hara) is an internal rebellion antagonistic to (shall I even say 'at enmity against') the good word of God. The two factors exist in each of us from birth and are only brought to light as experience gives opportunity. Our condition of depravity (the inability to follow after that which is good) becomes more and more apparent as we are introduced to good (God's word) and evil (anything adversarial to God's word).

I think Paul refers to this struggle of inclinations when he mentions not being able to do that which he would and doing that which he would not in Romans 7. While man is capable of recognizing good through intellect, reason and the yetzer hatov (I don't think a Calvinist would allow for this) there is no natural ability to follow after it as there is a natural ability to follow after evil. It is this natural ability to follow after evil I see as the 'sinful nature.' An unnatural ability to follow after that which is good, I believe, comes through a regenerative work of God.

Christ said there is none good but God (Matthew 19:17; Mark 10:18; Luke 18:19). Since we are not God, we are not naturally good. We are naturally adversarial to God and his word, meaning we are naturally sinful and/or evil. The heart must be born again in order to do that which is good. The good God must come to dwell in our hearts in order to cause us to walk in his ways and to overcome the sinful nature (Ezekiel 36:27).

Whether we accept the idea of an imputed sin of Adam or not there is an innate sinfulness within us which exists in constant rebellion against God. We need to be cleansed of this constant rebellion. Thus our justification deals not only with those sins we've personally committed but with this nature of rebellion as well.

Adino there is NO great fuss with me on this issue I also believe man is born with a nature that is disposed or inclined to sin. NO one will have to teach them to sin they by NATURE WILL sin. I think your argument on naturally good is missing the point I did NOT say the were GOOD I said they were INNOCENT. Without will or choosing or committing sins in mind or actions while they might NOT be good how can they be EVIL! YOU are saying infants having neither done good or evil are evil. I am saying they are innocent neither good nor evil.
How can infants constantly rebel against God???????? Wanting to be fed, burped, held, sleep, talked to, walked????
Yes they will rebel in time because they will CHOOSE to. Their nature will lead them there.
I think too much theological rangling is done on this to promote Calvin's doctrine of election! How many points do YOU believe in?

[Adino]

Steve, do you believe the internal sinful nature needs to be ultimately eradicated?

Will the sinful nature exist in heaven?

If the nature itself is at enmity against God can it exist, even in a child, without it needing justification?

[Bro-Larry]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I don't know if I believe thye have the imputed sin of Adam? They have his nature that is disposed to sin and will sin in time. And imputed righteousness WITHOUT faith????????????????????????????

Nope I am not a taker.

We are all born alive unto God, but with the seed of Adam's sin in us. Then when we acquire a knowledge of God's law, it revives sin and brings condemnation, which ultimately results in death. (Rom 7:9)

But thanks be to God who gives us the victory over condemnation, through Christ Jesus. (Rom 8:1)

[oracle]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley
No He was not! However dying through a judgment and being cast into an eternal lake of fire is quite different.

Then why would God condemn someone who is innocent to death? That doesn't make sense. Think about that. This discussion is deep. Nothing is hidden from the eyes of God, He knows what we will do before we even make a move. This is how God can call Israel a transgressor from the womb!

(Isaiah 48:8) Yea, thou heardest not; yea, thou knewest not; yea, from that time that thine ear was not opened: for I KNEW THAT THOU WOULDEST DEAL VERY TREACHEROUSLY, and WAST CALLED A TRANSGRESSOR FROM THE WOMB.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Adino

Steve, do you believe the internal sinful nature needs to be ultimately eradicated?

Will the sinful nature exist in heaven?

If the nature itself is at enmity against God can it exist, even in a child, without it needing justification?

Adino we get a NEW body in the resurrection we will be just like Him. 1Jn.3:2

Yes that child's nature will be enemy against God when he begans to make choices it will choose wrong. Adino we are talking about babies.

[bkstokes]

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but I personally think that "oracle" and Dr. Vaughan are one and the same.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by oracle

Then why would God condemn someone who is innocent to death? That doesn't make sense. Think about that. This discussion is deep. Nothing is hidden from the eyes of God, He knows what we will do before we even make a move. This is how God can call Israel a transgressor from the womb!

I am not arguing with the passage just tell us WHAT transgression a baby commits. I not once among my detractors NOT ONE has told us the sins a baby commits I wonder why? Could it be they can't think of one?

FROM the womb they become transgressors it does NOT say WHEN only FROM. As a baby??????????????? What sin did Isreal commit as a baby?