What is the different between original sin and daily sin.
- Thread starter Jackson123
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Would you quote from Isaiah and Daniel so I could understand more what you are saying? 
Isa 28:15 Because ye have said, We have made a covenant with death, and with hell are we at agreement; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, it shall not come unto us: for we have made lies our refuge, and under falsehood have we hid ourselves:
Isa 28:16 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD, Behold, I lay in Zion for a foundation a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation: he that believeth shall not make haste.
Isa 28:17 Judgment also will I lay to the line, and righteousness to the plummet: and the hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies, and the waters shall overflow the hiding place.
Isa 28:18 And your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the overflowing scourge shall pass through, then ye shall be trodden down by it.
Isa 28:19 From the time that it goeth forth it shall take you: for morning by morning shall it pass over, by day and by night: and it shall be a vexation only to understand the report.
Isa 28:20 For the bed is shorter than that a man can stretch himself on it: and the covering narrower than that he can wrap himself in it.
This is Isaiah speaking of the covenant with death disanulled , I am not an original sin advocate but instead I am learned on the covenant of sin and death wich of was introduced at the fall of Adam when sin was established upon man bringing upon man , God's curse (Gen 3:16-17 / john 3:18-19 / mat 25:41 Acts 3:22-23 ) for disobedience from this point on , was sin imputeth into man as written in (genesis chapter 3) that no sacrifice could really make a man free since that sacrifice would have to be repeated continually but as daniel the prophet prophesied ... Dan 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
Dan 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
Dan 9:27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
It is unreasonable for an innocent baby to be condemned to hell for simply being born. It is a wicked doctrine.
God is not the vindictive tyrant that such a belief entails. Babies are innocent and are not condemned. It is human beings who invent these kind of notions, no doubt under the influence of dark spiritual forces.
That people uphold such blatant evil doctrines is proof positive that they themselves are devoid of any concept of righteousness and justice. There people assert the love and justice of God and yet teach the opposite of it.
It is by this attitude that people like John Calvin could uphold the burning alive of people he deemed to be heretics all in the name of God. Michael Servetus being a famous example...
Michael Servetus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christian's outside the common religious system have been persecuted by religious people ever since the church began. Remember it was the Pharisees back in Jerusalem who had Jesus put to death. It wasn't the atheists, it was the religious people.
Here is another example of what perverted doctrines lead people to do. Martin Luther wrote this in 1525...
The Facts About Luther, Patrick F. O'Hare, 1916, pages 236-237
books.google.com/books?id=ndoPAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236
These folks could all be "holier than thou" one moment and then the next "wicked and evil." Just like the Pharisees of old. They had a form of godliness on the outside but internally were wicked.
Martin Luther invented "faith alone" where he disconnected "purity of heart" from salvation whereby he was able to teach that salvation was purely positional and basically a cloaked state for ongoing wickedness ("God adorning dung" was how he explained it). Martin Luther was the father of the reformation and pastors quote from him in their sermons and admire him greatly.
The false teachers all use Romans 3:23 as a proof text for universal sinfulness of all mankind (including babies) and for perpetually ongoing sin. Yet what is that verse actually teaching?
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
We have indeed all fallen short of the glory of God.
1. We are born into a corrupt world.
2. We are all born in an ignorant state.
3. We are born neither righteous nor unrighteous but subject to the natural passion of the flesh.
3. We are born with an instinct of self preservation.
Thus we are all born undefiled and pure but ignorant and selfish basically in an animal state. There can be no sin (in the sense of rebellion) without knowledge of right doing and thus no guilt can be imputed. God is not unjust where He would demand condemnation for not doing that which one is unable to do. That is common sense and that is justice.
As a child's intellect develops they become aware of law. Both the law of conscience and law of statute. It is in the violation of law that sin is empowered to kill and bring condemnation. This is what Paul teaches here...
Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
Rom 7:10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
Rom 7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
Babies are alive without the law. It is only when the child reaches a certain age that the command comes (due to reason, conscience and guidance) and it is sin which takes occasion by the commandment deceives and kills.
This is what happened in the garden with Adam and Eve. They were both in an innocent state ignorant of the knowledge of good and evil. They were given a prohibition. Eve was then deceived by Satan into thinking that the consequences of violating the prohibition were not true. Eve was then drawn to violate the prohibition by the natural passions of her flesh and due to being deceived she sinned. Adam then likewise followed his wife's example because he loved her more than God.
They then both found themselves cut off from a direct relationship with God and thus alone and naked, in which they were ashamed. They had also become aware of good and evil. They had sold themselves into the kingdom of Satan via yielding themselves to Satan's methodology. Satan was challenging God's justice (just like in Job).
The similar thing happens to all those who have been born since them. The difference though is that we are not born walking with God, we are born into a sinful world subject to the natural passions. Adam and Eve were created subject to natural passions but walking with God. Thus they fell.
We are fallen in the sense that we are born into Satan's kingdom but NOT SOLD TO IT. We only sell ourselves into it when we first sin. That is when we spiritually die. Until that time we are still right with God, just not walking with God due to our ignorance.
Jesus redeems mankind from Satan's kingdom by putting a claim upon all those who will repent and abide in His methodology, repudiating the methodology of Satan.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
You see Jesus came to demonstrate the righteousness of God in a flesh body. Jesus came to draw all men unto Himself that they may believe in Him and abide in His methodology which is simply the "Spirit of His life." We are redeemed through abiding in that Spirit, a state we enter into via repentance and faith. Jesus purchased a people from slavery to sin and God is just in mercifully forgiving those people of their past sins because they have forsaken Satan's kingdom and come under the governorship of His Son. Therefore they are not going to treat God's mercy as a license to sin.
Really think about these things and study diligently the scriptures.
Original Sin, babies condemned, flesh being sinful, Jesus being punishes as a substitute so sinners can keep sinning without condemnation are all satanic doctrines which destroy what the Bible actually teaches.
The wolves will quote isolated portions of the Bible but you will always notice that they argue in favour of sin. Bottom line is they reject heart purity in salvation and uphold ongoing wickedness in salvation. Don't believe it? Ask them.
Ask these wolves if a child molester has to stop molesting children BEFORE God will forgive them. That question peels back the deception.
God is not the vindictive tyrant that such a belief entails. Babies are innocent and are not condemned. It is human beings who invent these kind of notions, no doubt under the influence of dark spiritual forces.
That people uphold such blatant evil doctrines is proof positive that they themselves are devoid of any concept of righteousness and justice. There people assert the love and justice of God and yet teach the opposite of it.
It is by this attitude that people like John Calvin could uphold the burning alive of people he deemed to be heretics all in the name of God. Michael Servetus being a famous example...
Michael Servetus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Christian's outside the common religious system have been persecuted by religious people ever since the church began. Remember it was the Pharisees back in Jerusalem who had Jesus put to death. It wasn't the atheists, it was the religious people.
Here is another example of what perverted doctrines lead people to do. Martin Luther wrote this in 1525...
The Facts About Luther, Patrick F. O'Hare, 1916, pages 236-237
books.google.com/books?id=ndoPAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA236&lpg=PA236
These folks could all be "holier than thou" one moment and then the next "wicked and evil." Just like the Pharisees of old. They had a form of godliness on the outside but internally were wicked.
Martin Luther invented "faith alone" where he disconnected "purity of heart" from salvation whereby he was able to teach that salvation was purely positional and basically a cloaked state for ongoing wickedness ("God adorning dung" was how he explained it). Martin Luther was the father of the reformation and pastors quote from him in their sermons and admire him greatly.
The false teachers all use Romans 3:23 as a proof text for universal sinfulness of all mankind (including babies) and for perpetually ongoing sin. Yet what is that verse actually teaching?
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
We have indeed all fallen short of the glory of God.
1. We are born into a corrupt world.
2. We are all born in an ignorant state.
3. We are born neither righteous nor unrighteous but subject to the natural passion of the flesh.
3. We are born with an instinct of self preservation.
Thus we are all born undefiled and pure but ignorant and selfish basically in an animal state. There can be no sin (in the sense of rebellion) without knowledge of right doing and thus no guilt can be imputed. God is not unjust where He would demand condemnation for not doing that which one is unable to do. That is common sense and that is justice.
As a child's intellect develops they become aware of law. Both the law of conscience and law of statute. It is in the violation of law that sin is empowered to kill and bring condemnation. This is what Paul teaches here...
Rom 7:9 For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.
Rom 7:10 And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.
Rom 7:11 For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.
Babies are alive without the law. It is only when the child reaches a certain age that the command comes (due to reason, conscience and guidance) and it is sin which takes occasion by the commandment deceives and kills.
This is what happened in the garden with Adam and Eve. They were both in an innocent state ignorant of the knowledge of good and evil. They were given a prohibition. Eve was then deceived by Satan into thinking that the consequences of violating the prohibition were not true. Eve was then drawn to violate the prohibition by the natural passions of her flesh and due to being deceived she sinned. Adam then likewise followed his wife's example because he loved her more than God.
They then both found themselves cut off from a direct relationship with God and thus alone and naked, in which they were ashamed. They had also become aware of good and evil. They had sold themselves into the kingdom of Satan via yielding themselves to Satan's methodology. Satan was challenging God's justice (just like in Job).
The similar thing happens to all those who have been born since them. The difference though is that we are not born walking with God, we are born into a sinful world subject to the natural passions. Adam and Eve were created subject to natural passions but walking with God. Thus they fell.
We are fallen in the sense that we are born into Satan's kingdom but NOT SOLD TO IT. We only sell ourselves into it when we first sin. That is when we spiritually die. Until that time we are still right with God, just not walking with God due to our ignorance.
Jesus redeems mankind from Satan's kingdom by putting a claim upon all those who will repent and abide in His methodology, repudiating the methodology of Satan.
Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
You see Jesus came to demonstrate the righteousness of God in a flesh body. Jesus came to draw all men unto Himself that they may believe in Him and abide in His methodology which is simply the "Spirit of His life." We are redeemed through abiding in that Spirit, a state we enter into via repentance and faith. Jesus purchased a people from slavery to sin and God is just in mercifully forgiving those people of their past sins because they have forsaken Satan's kingdom and come under the governorship of His Son. Therefore they are not going to treat God's mercy as a license to sin.
Really think about these things and study diligently the scriptures.
Original Sin, babies condemned, flesh being sinful, Jesus being punishes as a substitute so sinners can keep sinning without condemnation are all satanic doctrines which destroy what the Bible actually teaches.
The wolves will quote isolated portions of the Bible but you will always notice that they argue in favour of sin. Bottom line is they reject heart purity in salvation and uphold ongoing wickedness in salvation. Don't believe it? Ask them.
Ask these wolves if a child molester has to stop molesting children BEFORE God will forgive them. That question peels back the deception.
Here is a passage which illustrates well what I was speaking of in my last post.
Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Joh 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
The condemnation of sinners is in the context of rebellion. Light has come but instead of yielding to that light people choose darkness. That is what God condemns. That is the very opposite of what those who teach Original Sin are saying, they claim that the baby is born already condemned, thus the condemnation is simply that one is born a descendent of Adam because Adam sinned. Under their theology the condemnation has NOTHING to do with "loving darkness rather than light when the light has presented itself." These people reject that because ultimately what they are rejecting is personal accountability for their sin.
A little child with an instinct for self preservation as well as being subject to the draw of the natural passions of the flesh will naturally want something it desires.
The child may see a toy that looks appealing and demand it even if another child is playing with it. Thus the child "in principle" is covetous and thus wrong but in practice the child is ignorant and does not know any better. Thus this kind of "sin" or "wrong doing" is not a sin unto death because there is no rebellion or rejection of the light involved.
We are all born into this world as children of God. It is through the light of conscience, scripture, and correct guidance by God's servants (godly parents etc.) that God educates us. This education is to bring us to a knowledge of the correct way to do things, ie. it is a manifestation of the grace of God.
Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
Tit 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
If we yield ourselves from the heart to that grace then the righteousness of God will manifest within our hearts. This in effect will save us from the corruption associated with flesh in the sense that the flesh itself draws people away from God, not that the flesh is actually evil.
There is no good thing in our flesh in the sense that "living in the flesh" devoid of being "led of the Spirit" can only lead to destruction. This is why we need God.
Again, think about these things. This is what the Bible teaches us.
Joh 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Joh 3:20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Joh 3:21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
The condemnation of sinners is in the context of rebellion. Light has come but instead of yielding to that light people choose darkness. That is what God condemns. That is the very opposite of what those who teach Original Sin are saying, they claim that the baby is born already condemned, thus the condemnation is simply that one is born a descendent of Adam because Adam sinned. Under their theology the condemnation has NOTHING to do with "loving darkness rather than light when the light has presented itself." These people reject that because ultimately what they are rejecting is personal accountability for their sin.
A little child with an instinct for self preservation as well as being subject to the draw of the natural passions of the flesh will naturally want something it desires.
The child may see a toy that looks appealing and demand it even if another child is playing with it. Thus the child "in principle" is covetous and thus wrong but in practice the child is ignorant and does not know any better. Thus this kind of "sin" or "wrong doing" is not a sin unto death because there is no rebellion or rejection of the light involved.
We are all born into this world as children of God. It is through the light of conscience, scripture, and correct guidance by God's servants (godly parents etc.) that God educates us. This education is to bring us to a knowledge of the correct way to do things, ie. it is a manifestation of the grace of God.
Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
Tit 2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
If we yield ourselves from the heart to that grace then the righteousness of God will manifest within our hearts. This in effect will save us from the corruption associated with flesh in the sense that the flesh itself draws people away from God, not that the flesh is actually evil.
There is no good thing in our flesh in the sense that "living in the flesh" devoid of being "led of the Spirit" can only lead to destruction. This is why we need God.
Again, think about these things. This is what the Bible teaches us.
Last edited:
C
is based on the conclusion of this conversation:
which is liked by Elin.
Concerning righteousness
But concerning sin
So should the correct understanding of the scripture be:
One can't help to sin because Adam sinned even though he does not believe in Adam but one cannot be righteous because the second Adam Christ is righteous unless he believes in Christ?
And thus if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation a flaw product because he still carries original sin?
And this original sin is imputed by default (no work) even in this new creation but the righteous of Christ requires one to believe in Christ (the work to believe)? Just asking...
which is liked by Elin.
Concerning righteousness
But concerning sin
So should the correct understanding of the scripture be:
One can't help to sin because Adam sinned even though he does not believe in Adam but one cannot be righteous because the second Adam Christ is righteous unless he believes in Christ?
And thus if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation a flaw product because he still carries original sin?
And this original sin is imputed by default (no work) even in this new creation but the righteous of Christ requires one to believe in Christ (the work to believe)? Just asking...
So you say, but you nor anyone else has yet established the the popular protestant doctrine of Original Sin is even found in Rom 5:18. It is actually condemned in that verse as is the statment of what it constitutes in Rom 5:12. Every other text in scripture denies the concept of Original Sin as first developed by Augustine and adopted by most Reformers. It has probably been changed somewhat by many, but the root idea is still that God imputes Adam's sin to man. That man has a sin nature and is born a sinner, None of that is found in scripture. If you think it is, point out just where it states it?
But you have not established that it is actually there. You are simply assuming it is there with no evidence to support it.
Since scripture does not support Original Sin, it cannot be against itself.
The concept denies the Incarnation of Christ. Thus it denies the very salvation that Christ gave to the world by defeating death, sin and the devil. Could you explain your view of Original Sin in the light of the rest of Scripture regarding our salvation, Christ's gift to the world, all of mankind as stated in Rom 5:18.
It might also help to define Original Sin as you interpret it since there are many variations of the view today in it nuances.
Since scripture does not support Original Sin, it cannot be against itself.
The concept denies the Incarnation of Christ. Thus it denies the very salvation that Christ gave to the world by defeating death, sin and the devil. Could you explain your view of Original Sin in the light of the rest of Scripture regarding our salvation, Christ's gift to the world, all of mankind as stated in Rom 5:18.
It might also help to define Original Sin as you interpret it since there are many variations of the view today in it nuances.
The basic definition in my understanding would be...
The fundamental principle of Original Sin is that "human nature" was permanently changed due to Adam sinning and that this change is what actually "necessitates" sinning. Thus the reason people choose to sin is because they have no choice not to, sin is natural.
Thus under Original Sin sinning is not a matter of real choice, instead it is a matter of necessity due to a birth state. This view of sin means that no human being is actually responsible for their sin but are rather victims.
This in turn completely redefines the means in which we approach God. If we are sinners by birth nature and therefore sin by necessity (because we cannot do otherwise) then repentance is simply a "confession of sinfulness" and thus we approach God still in rebellion. That is why people believe that a child molester does not have to sop molesting children BEFORE God can forgive them, the child molester was "born a sinner" and their sin is not really their fault and due to this they cannot be compelled to stop it because they can't.
Now if sin is not propagated to Adam's descendents by natural reproduction or divine imputation then sinning is crime and not a birth defect. If all men CHOOSE to sin when they don't have to then the sinner is responsible for their own sin, not Adam, not a birth state.
If this is the case then we don't approach God as victims but rather as criminals. Repentance means we change our minds about "choosing to sin" and we henceforth "choose not to." Thus the approach to God involves a cessation of rebellion and an internal allowance of God to work in us whereby we are transformed.
Both approaches are very different. The second approach is how the Bible teaches it, not the first. That is why Jesus would preach "go and sin no more" because it was possible through godly sorrow working repentance whereby salvation would follow.
It is the implanted word which cleanses us but in order for that word to be implanted we have to forsake our rebellion. In forsaking rebellion we can learn to do good. It is not "sinless perfection" as many accusers accuse, it is a "pure heart submitted to God" instead of a "defiled heart in rebellion to God." Many people today have bought into a Gospel where their heart remains defiled and the blood of Jesus cloaks that inward defilement. That is the deception.
The fundamental principle of Original Sin is that "human nature" was permanently changed due to Adam sinning and that this change is what actually "necessitates" sinning. Thus the reason people choose to sin is because they have no choice not to, sin is natural.
Thus under Original Sin sinning is not a matter of real choice, instead it is a matter of necessity due to a birth state. This view of sin means that no human being is actually responsible for their sin but are rather victims.
This in turn completely redefines the means in which we approach God. If we are sinners by birth nature and therefore sin by necessity (because we cannot do otherwise) then repentance is simply a "confession of sinfulness" and thus we approach God still in rebellion. That is why people believe that a child molester does not have to sop molesting children BEFORE God can forgive them, the child molester was "born a sinner" and their sin is not really their fault and due to this they cannot be compelled to stop it because they can't.
Now if sin is not propagated to Adam's descendents by natural reproduction or divine imputation then sinning is crime and not a birth defect. If all men CHOOSE to sin when they don't have to then the sinner is responsible for their own sin, not Adam, not a birth state.
If this is the case then we don't approach God as victims but rather as criminals. Repentance means we change our minds about "choosing to sin" and we henceforth "choose not to." Thus the approach to God involves a cessation of rebellion and an internal allowance of God to work in us whereby we are transformed.
Both approaches are very different. The second approach is how the Bible teaches it, not the first. That is why Jesus would preach "go and sin no more" because it was possible through godly sorrow working repentance whereby salvation would follow.
It is the implanted word which cleanses us but in order for that word to be implanted we have to forsake our rebellion. In forsaking rebellion we can learn to do good. It is not "sinless perfection" as many accusers accuse, it is a "pure heart submitted to God" instead of a "defiled heart in rebellion to God." Many people today have bought into a Gospel where their heart remains defiled and the blood of Jesus cloaks that inward defilement. That is the deception.
Threads like this are very good because they clearly show how vacuous the foundation for Original Sin really is. It has no foundation in the Bible or in the early church.
The promoters of this doctrine in this thread have no content in their answers. All they can do is refer to little tidbits of the Bible which they present out of context, like Isa 51:5, Rom 5:12 and Rom 5:18.
The early church fathers defended the freedom of the will from any notion of "inability." Even though certain early church fathers alluded to a "vice of origin" like Tertullian or even Irenaeus who alluded to the "results of the fall," none of them taught Original Sin and associated it to a change of nature.
Irenaeus taught that the fall resulted in Adam leading the way for his descendents to plunge head first into the kingdom of Satan. Not through a change of nature, but through ignorance wrought through God not walking with humankind. Human beings were all born into a world of sin, subject to the physical passions, lacking understanding of what sin really was, thus sinning was the path of least resistance. It was Jesus Christ who broke this chain of events by recapitulating (ie. summed up) humankind back to God through doing everything the correct way, thus all humankind could "through Jesus Christ" be reunited with God.
The only early church father that I can find teaching anything like Original Sin before Augustine of Hippo in the fourth century is Tatian (c. 110 - c. 172) and this man was declared a heretic because he mixed gnostic philosophy with Christianity.
Again any one of us can read early church writings. Here is a link to the writings of the first Christian's after the apostles...
http://holybooks.lichtenbergpress.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Ante-Nicene-Fathers-Vol-1.pdf
Read those writings and you and be as shocked as I was as to how different the Gospel preached today actually is. It is not even close.
Those who teach Original Sin today would have us believe that Polycarp (student of John), Clement of Rome (knew Peter who made him a bishop and was possibly a student of Paul), Ireneaus (student of Polycarp), Ignatius of Antioch (student of John), Justin Martyr (c. 100 - c. 165), and even Barnabas were all false teachers.
Those who teach Original Sin today would have us believe that the early church was in error until Augustine came along and developed the doctrine of Original Sin from the writings of Paul, and that this doctrine was finally accepted as orthodox due to the Pelagius/Augustine controversy when it was simply not taught before then.
I think that the early church was correct. I think the early church was right in opposing the dual nature doctrine of the Gnostics. I think the early church was right in upholding the free will of man and personal responsibility.
The modern heretics are those who follow the tradition of Augustine and pervert the Gospel with their dual nature allusions premised on the doctrine of Original Sin. It is these people who are the modern Pharisees, devoid of pure hearts, people who teach that God condemns innocent babies to hell, who teach that God condemns people for not doing which they are unable. Those are the modern heretics, not those who uphold righteousness, heart purity, obedience to God, walking in the light, digging deep, remaining steadfast in the truth, sinning no more, loving God and our neighbour whole heartedly.
Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isa 5:21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
The promoters of this doctrine in this thread have no content in their answers. All they can do is refer to little tidbits of the Bible which they present out of context, like Isa 51:5, Rom 5:12 and Rom 5:18.
The early church fathers defended the freedom of the will from any notion of "inability." Even though certain early church fathers alluded to a "vice of origin" like Tertullian or even Irenaeus who alluded to the "results of the fall," none of them taught Original Sin and associated it to a change of nature.
Irenaeus taught that the fall resulted in Adam leading the way for his descendents to plunge head first into the kingdom of Satan. Not through a change of nature, but through ignorance wrought through God not walking with humankind. Human beings were all born into a world of sin, subject to the physical passions, lacking understanding of what sin really was, thus sinning was the path of least resistance. It was Jesus Christ who broke this chain of events by recapitulating (ie. summed up) humankind back to God through doing everything the correct way, thus all humankind could "through Jesus Christ" be reunited with God.
The only early church father that I can find teaching anything like Original Sin before Augustine of Hippo in the fourth century is Tatian (c. 110 - c. 172) and this man was declared a heretic because he mixed gnostic philosophy with Christianity.
Again any one of us can read early church writings. Here is a link to the writings of the first Christian's after the apostles...
http://holybooks.lichtenbergpress.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/Ante-Nicene-Fathers-Vol-1.pdf
Read those writings and you and be as shocked as I was as to how different the Gospel preached today actually is. It is not even close.
Those who teach Original Sin today would have us believe that Polycarp (student of John), Clement of Rome (knew Peter who made him a bishop and was possibly a student of Paul), Ireneaus (student of Polycarp), Ignatius of Antioch (student of John), Justin Martyr (c. 100 - c. 165), and even Barnabas were all false teachers.
Those who teach Original Sin today would have us believe that the early church was in error until Augustine came along and developed the doctrine of Original Sin from the writings of Paul, and that this doctrine was finally accepted as orthodox due to the Pelagius/Augustine controversy when it was simply not taught before then.
I think that the early church was correct. I think the early church was right in opposing the dual nature doctrine of the Gnostics. I think the early church was right in upholding the free will of man and personal responsibility.
The modern heretics are those who follow the tradition of Augustine and pervert the Gospel with their dual nature allusions premised on the doctrine of Original Sin. It is these people who are the modern Pharisees, devoid of pure hearts, people who teach that God condemns innocent babies to hell, who teach that God condemns people for not doing which they are unable. Those are the modern heretics, not those who uphold righteousness, heart purity, obedience to God, walking in the light, digging deep, remaining steadfast in the truth, sinning no more, loving God and our neighbour whole heartedly.
Isa 5:20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Isa 5:21 Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
Last edited:
All through history it is the theologians who were wrong.
Both Jeremiah and Isaiah preached against a corrupt religious system.
Jesus preached against a corrupt religious system.
Why should we be surprised today that the religious system of the present day is utterly devoid of the truth?
Jesus did warn us...
Luk 21:8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Both Jeremiah and Isaiah preached against a corrupt religious system.
Jesus preached against a corrupt religious system.
Why should we be surprised today that the religious system of the present day is utterly devoid of the truth?
Jesus did warn us...
Luk 21:8 And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and the time draweth near: go ye not therefore after them.
Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.