Original Sin

[mfblume]

This needs to be discussed. Unless a person changes the text of the KJV, original sin cannot be denied. What think all of you?

[mfblume]

Romans 5 says that one man's disobedience made many into sinners. That is essentially the doctrine of original sin in a nutshell directly from the bible.

Rom 5:18-19 KJV Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (19) For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.


Because Christ's righteousness is given to us all, then by the same token Adam's sin was given to us all.

[mfblume]

1Co 15:21-22 KJV For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. (22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Romans 5 says that one man's disobedience made many into sinners. That is essentially the doctrine of original sin in a nutshell directly from the bible.

Rom 5:18-19 KJV Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. (19) For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.


Because Christ's righteousness is given to us all, then by the same token Adam's sin was given to us all.

Originally Posted by mfblume

1Co 15:21-22 KJV For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. (22) For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

There is another view that many Christians seem to ignore, that being that scripture speaking of death does not mean natural death. But separation from relationship with God.
Yes I have heard the detailed explanations of Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
When God said this that what is meant is that man would begin to die. But God did not say that he said "in the day you eat you shall die" and we know from the story that as soon as Adam and Eve ate there was a change in the way they viewed God and each other. First they realized they were naked and then they hid from God. This happened the very moment they ate the fruit.
I must ask the question, why are we so wrapped up in the natural death, and resurrection, when we should be more about the new life Christ death brought to mankind in this life?
Did not Jesus say he came to bring life and that more abundantly? Was this speaking of eternal life or this life?

[shazeep]

no kidding, arg

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

There is another view that many Christians seem to ignore, that being that scripture speaking of death does not mean natural death. But separation from relationship with God.
Yes I have heard the detailed explanations of Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
When God said this that what is meant is that man would begin to die. But God did not say that he said "in the day you eat you shall die" and we know from the story that as soon as Adam and Eve ate there was a change in the way they viewed God and each other. First they realized they were naked and then they hid from God. This happened the very moment they ate the fruit.
I must ask the question, why are we so wrapped up in the natural death, and resurrection, when we should be more about the new life Christ death brought to mankind in this life?
Did not Jesus say he came to bring life and that more abundantly? Was this speaking of eternal life or this life?

Amen, that is the question--good stuff, Gd. I believe when they "ate" they "died," to God--spiritually, that is; the only kind God cares about, imo.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by shazeep

no kidding, arg
Amen, that is the question--good stuff, Gd. I believe when they "ate" they "died," to God--spiritually, that is; the only kind God cares about, imo.

I must disagree! Death implies an event from which there are NO avenue or means of recovery ... PERIOD! "Spiritual" implies having a mindset towards the things of God.

If it were true that Adam "died spiritually" when God imposed the judgment of death upon his physical body (Genesis 3:19), then the question arises, Who informed Cain and Abel of the commandment to offer a sacrifice to God upon an altar for sin. There are NO scriptural texts that discloses God or any other ever making these sons of Adam aware of this requirement, therefore common logic allows one to conclude that they were instructed in it by Adam. If he were "dead spiritually" he could not have instructed them in the way of righteousness.

Furthermore, to conclude that Adam "died spiritually," which would be the same as stating that God also judged him unworthy of eternal life, serves to negate Peter's words of 2 Peter 3:9 - "The Lord is not ... willing that ANY should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance."

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

no kidding, arg
Amen, that is the question--good stuff, Gd. I believe when they "ate" they "died," to God--spiritually, that is; the only kind God cares about, imo.

Not totally true. The Hebrew in Genesis 2 literally says IN DYING YOU SHALL DIE. It's more than "surely die." It speaks of a process. DYING. They died both spiritually and physically due to sin.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

There is another view that many Christians seem to ignore, that being that scripture speaking of death does not mean natural death. But separation from relationship with God.
Yes I have heard the detailed explanations of Gen 2:17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
When God said this that what is meant is that man would begin to die. But God did not say that he said "in the day you eat you shall die" and we know from the story that as soon as Adam and Eve ate there was a change in the way they viewed God and each other. First they realized they were naked and then they hid from God. This happened the very moment they ate the fruit.
I must ask the question, why are we so wrapped up in the natural death, and resurrection, when we should be more about the new life Christ death brought to mankind in this life?
Did not Jesus say he came to bring life and that more abundantly? Was this speaking of eternal life or this life?

It is both physical death and spiritual death. ALL DEATH came from sin, not just one kind.

It is for this reason that after Romans 5 speaks of death due to Adam, in Romans 6 we read JESUS LITERALLY HAD TO PHYSICALLY DIE on the cross to take our deaths upon Himself, of which we partake in baptism. We're baptized into his physical death not a spiritual one. he did not have to die spiritually alone for us to be baptized into his death. he had to physically die. If it is only spiritual death, then why use physical death as the penalty as though physical death had nothing to do with sin and Adam would have physically died, anyway?

NATURAL death is as much a result of sin as spiritual death. We're wrapped up in it because of what Paul taught, not just in Romans 5 but Romans 5 through 6 with physical death of Christ to redeem us.

Heb 9 says all of us are appointed to die once, and that is why Christ died once in our stead.

Heb 9:27-28 KJV And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: (28) So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

[shazeep]

don't get me wrong; original sin exists. i have no problem with that. but when it was made into a doctrine, "Original Sin"--incidentally, over the objections of many, splitting a Council, and the Est'd church at the time apart--it became, i am convinced, our downfall.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by shazeep

don't get me wrong; original sin exists. i have no problem with that. but when it was made into a doctrine, "Original Sin"--incidentally, over the objections of many, splitting a Council, and the Est'd church at the time apart--it became, i am convinced, our downfall.

If Paul taught it it must be doctrine.