What is the different between original sin and daily sin.

[Apostol2013]

Enoch walked faithfully with God; then he was no more, because God took him away...and Enoch was from Adam.

By faith Enoch was taken from this life, so that he did not experience death: "He could not be found, because God had taken him away." For before he was taken, he was commended as one who pleased God.

Original sin? What original sin?

By faith yes but Enoch knew the statutes of God passed down from adam , but in the sin of Our Father Adam entered the Law of sin and death , as spoken by isaiah that he will break disanull the covemant of sin and death but also spoken by daniel of that same prophecy of the reconcilliation of mankind.

 

[SeaBass]

I heard a term original sin and daily sin. Any body help me to understand what is the differemt, and what part of the bible talk about it?

1 Jn 3:4 "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law."

Sin is something committed, a transgression and not just an idea that is passed around as the man-made idea of "original sin". If no committing/transgression takes place - then no sin is taking place. No sin is being committed/no law transgressed by a newly conceived person. So no one is a sinner who has not committed sins/transgressed law.

I suppose "daily sin" would be sins committed daily/laws transgressed daily.

 

[Elin]

Well, I guess that does it...everyone can stop leading people to Christ because His righteousness is upon all humans just like Adams sin!!1

His righteousness is upon no one until they believe in Jesus Christ.

And for that, they need to hear the word of God.

I see. People need to be made aware of Christ for salvation, but unaware of Adams sin for condemnation.

Straw man. . .

Your intellectually dishonest methodology betrays the religious persuasion of your unbelief.

 

[jdbear]

Straw man. . .

Your intellectually dishonest methodology betrays the religious persuasion of your unbelief.

You want Jesus' sacrifice for all to be the equal but opposite solution to Adams sin for all...but then add knowledge for Christ, but not for Adam. Doesnt work that way sis. You've been screwing up Romans since chapter one.

 

[RedTent]

There are quite the answers to this questions posted here. One says she knows all so the case is closed. Another speaks of everyone paying penance for all sin. One speaks of God condemning the entire race, that infants go to hell, and that it is satanic to say we have original sin---like it is from the devil that Adam ate the apple? But the one that really tops them all is "intellectually dishonest methodology".

There aren't any posts telling that we are born in sin, we are fleshly beings but we have a loving wonderful God whose one desire for us is to live here in security and goodness and to live with Him forever.

 

[Calminian]

...The bible makes it clear that you can not continue in willful un-repented sin, and be saved.

If this is true, we'll all in trouble, but this is to be sure, bad theology. Ken, most of the sins you commit, you're completely aware of. You likely can claim ignorance for a great many as well, but rest assured, Christ died for all your sins, willful and ignorant. Had he not, you'd have no chance of getting to heaven.

I have a feeling I know the verse you're getting this idea from is in Hebrews chapter 10, but you can clarify that. But rest assured, your sins are covered. What you have to watch out for is having possibly a false faith, which does not produce conviction and repentance.

Regarding original sin, original just means first. There was a first sin in which Adam allowed death into the world. When he ate, the law of God was transferred to his mind, giving him knowledge of laws he had not been aware of before. Rather than receiving laws through direct revelation from God, as he had before, they became intrinsic to his nature. We have the law now in our hearts, and we stumble on it often. We simply can't claim ignorance.

 

[Calminian]

There are quite the answers to this questions posted here. One says she knows all so the case is closed. Another speaks of everyone paying penance for all sin. One speaks of God condemning the entire race, that infants go to hell, and that it is satanic to say we have original sin---like it is from the devil that Adam ate the apple? But the one that really tops them all is "intellectually dishonest methodology".

There aren't any posts telling that we are born in sin, we are fleshly beings but we have a loving wonderful God whose one desire for us is to live here in security and goodness and to live with Him forever.

Gen. 8:21 And the LORD smelled a soothing aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.

Psa. 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.


Psa. 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb;
They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.

There are many more. This is a theme in scripture. You do have choices, but your nature is wicked.

1Cor. 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[RedTent]

If this is true, we'll all in trouble, but this is to be sure, bad theology. Ken, most of the sins you commit, you're completely aware of. You likely can claim ignorance for a great many as well, but rest assured, Christ died for all your sins, willful and ignorant. Had he not, you'd have no chance of getting to heaven. .

I didn't think this was bad theology. John the Baptist who God used to prepare for Christ had a message of repent. I don't think his message would be against the one that Christ brought to us.
Rev_21:8 But as for the cowardly, the untrustworthy, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those involved with the occult and with drugs, idol-worshippers, and all liars — their destiny is the lake burning with fire and sulfur, the second death."

I was told that if we identify ourselves with a certain sin, we accept it as part of us, we will not be saved.

 

[Skinski7]

If this is true, we'll all in trouble, but this is to be sure, bad theology. Ken, most of the sins you commit, you're completely aware of. You likely can claim ignorance for a great many as well, but rest assured, Christ died for all your sins, willful and ignorant. Had he not, you'd have no chance of getting to heaven.

Sins of ignorance are not sins unto death.

God reckons FAITH as righteousness not ACTUAL PERFECTION.

Your premise of "we'll all be in trouble" is established on the notion that God requires ACTUAL PERFECTION instead of PERFECT FAITH.

God reckoned Abraham's FAITH as righteousness, not Abraham's deeds. Abraham was faithful from the heart and that is what counts.

God is looking at the heart of a man not external deeds in exclusion of the heart.

The end of the commandment is not "perfect deeds" but a "perfect heart."

1Ti 1:5 Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned:

1. Love out of a pure heart.
2. A good conscience.
3. Genuine faith.

These are the things that matter.

Original Sin destroys this because it teaches that human beings are naturally evil from birth and that sin is involuntary and has NOTHING to do with the will. Thus no human being can be held responsible for their wickedness because they were born that way.

If you were born a sinner then your sinfulness is not your fault.

Original Sin teaches "inability." Under the doctrine of Original Sin human beings simply CANNOT obey God, they cannot make the virtuous choice. That means that they CANNOT repent.

Original Sin redefines repentance to be a "confession of sinfulness" while the Bible teaches that repentance is a change of mind which necessitates a change in action.

Under Original Sin the rebellion to God continues because the burden is on God to make the rebellion stop.

Original Sin absolutely destroys the Gospel message because it presents another way of approaching God apart from repentance.



I have a feeling I know the verse you're getting this idea from is in Hebrews chapter 10, but you can clarify that. But rest assured, your sins are covered. What you have to watch out for is having possibly a false faith, which does not produce conviction and repentance.

Regarding original sin, original just means first. There was a first sin in which Adam allowed death into the world. When he ate, the law of God was transferred to his mind, giving him knowledge of laws he had not been aware of before. Rather than receiving laws through direct revelation from God, as he had before, they became intrinsic to his nature. We have the law now in our hearts, and we stumble on it often. We simply can't claim ignorance.[/QUOTE]

 

[Skinski7]

I didn't think this was bad theology. John the Baptist who God used to prepare for Christ had a message of repent. I don't think his message would be against the one that Christ brought to us.
Rev_21:8 But as for the cowardly, the untrustworthy, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those involved with the occult and with drugs, idol-worshippers, and all liars — their destiny is the lake burning with fire and sulfur, the second death."

I was told that if we identify ourselves with a certain sin, we accept it as part of us, we will not be saved.

See that is the thing, John the Baptist preached repentance.

John also preached...

Mat 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

That is the same message Paul preached in Acts...

Act 26:20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

Paul preached that deeds prove repentance. A genuine change of mind must be reflected by a complete change in action. Thus people need to repent and bring forth deeds that prove that repentance.

Original Sin teaches that people sin by necessity not by an act of free agency. Thus repentance under Original Sin is a mere "confession of sinfulness" and not a "forsaking of sin." Thus there can be no demand to "bring forth deeds worthy of repentance."

That is why every theology that teaches Original Sin teaches "sin in salvation" and thus have ripped any concept of "heart purity" as it connects to a genuine salvation experience.

Jesus preached about HEART PURITY and a pure heart does not produce evil fruit. It is the false teachers who teach that Christian's still produce evil fruit because they teach that "sin is in the flesh" and thus Christian "sin in thought, word and deed" everyday. That is why they preach the death of Christ as a "cloak" for an ongoing defiled state, whether it be the imputed righteousness of the Arminians or the imputed obedience of Jesus of the Calvinists.

 

[RedTent]

Original Sin destroys this because it teaches that human beings are naturally evil from birth and that sin is involuntary and has NOTHING to do with the will. Thus no human being can be held responsible for their wickedness because they were born that way.

If you were born a sinner then your sinfulness is not your fault. ]

You are doing with scripture what man so often does with man's self pride, you are not humbly listening to scripture and making it all fit together. You are using your own reasoning to make scripture fit what YOU think! You think that if you are born in sin, as scripture says, it results in taking away will, making you blameless. That is your decision about what the fact of being born in sin means.

We are to learn what God says, and humbly listen. We are given choices that we can make, it is scripture. We are born in sin, it is scripture. You are not to deny either. So you must learn that you are in a fleshly body that would lead you to sin, but you are to put on Christ and make Christ your leader not that fleshly body. You are given all that Christ did for you to help you do that.

 

[Skinski7]

Two posts above I left this section in the post by accident.

I have a feeling I know the verse you're getting this idea from is in Hebrews chapter 10, but you can clarify that. But rest assured, your sins are covered. What you have to watch out for is having possibly a false faith, which does not produce conviction and repentance.

Regarding original sin, original just means first. There was a first sin in which Adam allowed death into the world. When he ate, the law of God was transferred to his mind, giving him knowledge of laws he had not been aware of before. Rather than receiving laws through direct revelation from God, as he had before, they became intrinsic to his nature. We have the law now in our hearts, and we stumble on it often. We simply can't claim ignorance.

 

[chubbena]

By faith yes but Enoch knew the statutes of God passed down from adam , but in the sin of Our Father Adam entered the Law of sin and death , as spoken by isaiah that he will break disanull the covemant of sin and death but also spoken by daniel of that same prophecy of the reconcilliation of mankind.

Would you quote from Isaiah and Daniel so I could understand more what you are saying?

 

[Skinski7]

You are doing with scripture what man so often does with man's self pride, you are not humbly listening to scripture and making it all fit together. You are using your own reasoning to make scripture fit what YOU think! You think that if you are born in sin, as scripture says, it results in taking away will, making you blameless. That is your decision about what the fact of being born in sin means.

We are to learn what God says, and humbly listen. We are given choices that we can make, it is scripture. We are born in sin, it is scripture. You are not to deny either. So you must learn that you are in a fleshly body that would lead you to sin, but you are to put on Christ and make Christ your leader not that fleshly body. You are given all that Christ did for you to help you do that.

If you are "born a sinner" then sinning is not your fault. You are a victim of a condition of your birth. There is no way to get around that.

The early Church did not teach Original Sin. This doctrine only became orthodox in the Fourth Century when Augustine entered the picture.

All the proof texts people use to prove "born in sin" are out of context manipulations.

The Bible is clear that it is the "soul that sins that shall die." The Bible does not teach that the "soul that is born is dead."

Sin is a moral issue not a birth issue. By redefining sin to be some kind of ethereal substance passed down via seminal means or passed down via imputation necessitates sinners are not responsible for their sin. You cannot get around that.

If I was "born a sinner" then "being a sinner" is not my fault. It is God's fault.

If I "chose to sin" then "being a sinner" is my fault. The blame is not on God.

 

[chubbena]

If this is true, we'll all in trouble, but this is to be sure, bad theology. Ken, most of the sins you commit, you're completely aware of. You likely can claim ignorance for a great many as well, but rest assured, Christ died for all your sins, willful and ignorant. Had he not, you'd have no chance of getting to heaven.

I have a feeling I know the verse you're getting this idea from is in Hebrews chapter 10, but you can clarify that. But rest assured, your sins are covered. What you have to watch out for is having possibly a false faith, which does not produce conviction and repentance.

Regarding original sin, original just means first. There was a first sin in which Adam allowed death into the world. When he ate, the law of God was transferred to his mind, giving him knowledge of laws he had not been aware of before. Rather than receiving laws through direct revelation from God, as he had before, they became intrinsic to his nature. We have the law now in our hearts, and we stumble on it often. We simply can't claim ignorance.

Not in trouble but in knowing one's situation.
The Israelites in Exodus for example:
Many were saved from the bondage of slavery which is a type for sin.
For unintentional sins there were reconciliations available typified by animal sacrifices realized by the sacrifice of the Christ.
The stiff necked who died in the desert were those continued in wilful sin.
Were they saved? Were they not saved? Were they given many chances or were they doomed from the get go?

 

[just-me]

You are doing with scripture what man so often does with man's self pride, you are not humbly listening to scripture and making it all fit together. You are using your own reasoning to make scripture fit what YOU think! You think that if you are born in sin, as scripture says, it results in taking away will, making you blameless. That is your decision about what the fact of being born in sin means.

We are to learn what God says, and humbly listen. We are given choices that we can make, it is scripture. We are born in sin, it is scripture. You are not to deny either. So you must learn that you are in a fleshly body that would lead you to sin, but you are to put on Christ and make Christ your leader not that fleshly body. You are given all that Christ did for you to help you do that.

I see you're still kickin'. Elin went on a rampage this morning about you not being who you are. Well over 20 posts saying the same thing over and over as the following. LOL

This is not RedTent.

Where is RedTent? Is she okay?

 

[chubbena]

If you are "born a sinner" then sinning is not your fault. You are a victim of a condition of your birth. There is no way to get around that.

The early Church did not teach Original Sin. This doctrine only became orthodox in the Fourth Century when Augustine entered the picture.

All the proof texts people use to prove "born in sin" are out of context manipulations.

The Bible is clear that it is the "soul that sins that shall die." The Bible does not teach that the "soul that is born is dead."

Sin is a moral issue not a birth issue. By redefining sin to be some kind of ethereal substance passed down via seminal means or passed down via imputation necessitates sinners are not responsible for their sin. You cannot get around that.

If I was "born a sinner" then "being a sinner" is not my fault. It is God's fault.

If I "chose to sin" then "being a sinner" is my fault. The blame is not on God.

Whether born a sinner or not born a sinner is besides the point.
If anyone is in Christ he is a new creation.
What is a new creation?

 

[jdbear]

Gen. 8:21 And the LORD smelled a soothing aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.

Yes, the imagination...which requires knowledge is evil from an early age. The flood destroyed them because they degenerated into "only evil" thoughts. Please see Romans 1.

Psa. 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.

David is saying he was born into a sinful world, but that God is just to judge because of Davids own sin:
Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done*this*evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest,*and*be clear when thou judgest. Vs.4

Psa. 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb;
They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.

Speaking lies requires knowledge. Please read the rest of the chapter.

There are many more. This is a theme in scripture. You do have choices, but your nature is wicked.

People have the capacity to do good or bad and how you're taught has everything to do with it.

1Cor. 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

When I was a child, I wanted to know about God. Does anyone else remember feeling this way?

 

[Calminian]

Not in trouble but in knowing one's situation.
The Israelites in Exodus for example:
Many were saved from the bondage of slavery which is a type for sin.
For unintentional sins there were reconciliations available typified by animal sacrifices realized by the sacrifice of the Christ.
The stiff necked who died in the desert were those continued in wilful sin.
Were they saved? Were they not saved? Were they given many chances or were they doomed from the get go?

But that rebellion of Israel is typified in the book of Hebrews as a lack of faith. We're not saved by our lack of sin, we're saved by faith. As the Hebrews author put it,

Heb. 4:2 For indeed the gospel was preached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it.

Here the author is specifically using Moses' generation as a type for individuals who have heard the gospel. I would make the case that the willful sin spoken of in hebrews is the rejection of Christ, not random willful sins. We commit willful sins everyday, and they are covered. But when God illuminate individuals to the truth about their sin and need for a Savior and they reject that, they blaspheme the Holy Spirit. That's the unpardonable sin.

 

[Skinski7]

Gen. 8:21 And the LORD smelled a soothing aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.

That verse is not saying that human beings are "born dead in sin." That verse says that "the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth." In other words human beings go wayward at a young age. They are not born wayward.

Psa. 51:5

Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,

And in sin my mother conceived me.

David was brought forth in iniquity, he doesn't say "iniquity was brought forth in him" does he? David was born into a sinful word, a world full of iniquity. David was conceived in sin, he doesn't say, "sin was conceived in me" does he? Again David was brought forth into an evil world and influenced by that evil world. David's sin was a CHOICE.

Original Sin teaches that David's sin was a NECESSITY and thus he could blame his birth state instead of a choice he made.

Psalm 51 is David crying out in repentance and he uses hyperbole to describe his wretchedness. This verse was never used by the Jews or by the early Christians as a proof text for Original Sin because neither group taught Original Sin. It only became a proof text later when people began to pick through the Bible looking for things they could use to prove their dogma. They were conforming the Bible to their opinion instead of conforming their opinion to the Bible. There is no greater example of this than the NIV translation of Psalm 51:5 which blatantly rewrites the text to support a dogma, just like they do with the Greek word "sarx" in the New Testament.

Don't be deceived.

Psa. 58:3

The wicked are estranged from the womb;

They go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.

That is using hyperbole to emphasise a point. Do babies really speak lies as soon as they are born? Do the righteous really wash their feet in the blood of the wicked?

Psalm 58 is poetic hyperbole.

Righteousness and wickedness are MORAL ISSUE and involve free will. A lion or tiger cannot be declared wicked because they kill and eat an antelope, neither could a murderer and cannibal be declared wicked if that deed is performed apart from free moral agency.

There are many more. This is a theme in scripture. You do have choices, but your nature is wicked.

1Cor. 2:14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yes the man who is given over to the lusts of the flesh like a beast. We are not born "beasts" for we have a conscience and intellect.

We have this verse...

Eph 2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

Which we can contrast to this verse...

Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

If human beings are "born wicked" and are thus "naturally evil from birth" then Rom 2:14 is a lie because people could not "do by nature" the things contained in the law.

Rom 2:14 is speaking of our conscience, our natural inclination to good through the light of God manifesting to us through our conscience.

Eph 2:3 is speaking of a sinful nature which develops over time due to habitual sin.

Here is what we find in the Thayer's Lexicon...

STRONGS NT 5449: φύσις

φύσις, φύσεως, ἡ (from φύω, which see, as Latin nature from nascor, ingenium from geno, gigno), from Homer, Odyssey 10, 303 down; nature, i. e. a. the nature of things, the force, laws, order, of nature; as opposed to what is monstrous, abnormal, perverse: ὁ, ἡ, τό παρά φύσιν, that which is contrary to nature's laws, against nature, Romans 1:26 (οἱ παρά φύσιν τῇ Ἀφροδιτη χρώμενοι, Athen. 13, p. 605; ὁ παιδεραστής ... τήν παρά φύσιν ἡδονήν διώκει, Philo de spec. legg. i., § 7); as opposed to what has been produced by the art of man: οἱ κατά φύσιν κλάδοι, the natural branches, i. e. branches by the operation of nature, Romans 11:21, 24 (Winer's Grammar, 193 (182)), contrasted with οἱ ἐγκεντρισθεντες παρά φύσιν, contrary to the plan of nature, cf. 24; ἡ κατά φύσιν ἀγριέλαιος, ibid.; as opposed to what is imaginary or fictitious: οἱ μή φύσει ὄντες θεοί, who are gods not by nature, but according to the mistaken opinion of the Gentiles (λεγόμενοι θεοί, 1 Corinthians 8:5), Galatians 4:8; nature, i. e. natural sense, native conviction or knowledge, as opposed to what is learned by instruction and accomplished by training or prescribed by law: ἡ φύσις (i. e. the native sense of propriety) διδάσκει τί, 1 Corinthians 11:14; φύσει ποιεῖν τά τοῦ ναμου, natura magistra, guided by their natural sense of what is right and proper, Romans 2:14.
b. birth, physical origin: ἡμεῖς φύσει Ἰουδαῖοι, we so far as our origin is considered, i. e. by birth, are Jews, Galatians 2:15 (φύσει νεώτερος, Sophocles O. C. 1295; τῷ μέν φύσει πατρίς, τόν δέ νόμῳ πολίτην ἐπεποιηντο, Isocrates Evagr. 21; φύσει βάρβαροι ὄντες, νόμῳ δέ Ἕλληνες, Plato, Menex., p. 245 d.; cf. Grimm on Wis. 13:1); ἡ ἐκ φύσεως ἀκροβυστία, who by birth is uncircumcised or a Gentile (opposed to one who, although circumcised, has made himself a Gentile by his iniquity and spiritual perversity), Romans 2:27.
c. a mode of feeling and acting which by long habit has become nature: ἦμεν φύσει τέκνα ὀργῆς, by (our depraved) nature we were exposed to the wrath of God, Ephesians 2:3 (this meaning is evident from the preceding context, and stands in contrast with the change of heart and life wrought through Christ by the blessing of divine grace; φύσει πρός τάς κολασεις ἐπιεικῶς ἔχουσιν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι, Josephus, Antiquities 13, 10, 6. (Others (see Meyer) would lay more stress here upon the constitution in which this 'habitual course of evil' has its origin, whether that constitution be regarded (with some) as already developed at birth, or (better) as undeveloped; cf. Aristotle, pol. 1, 2, p. 1252{b}, 32f οἷον ἕκαστον ἐστι τῆς γενέσεως τελεσθεισης, ταύτην φαμέν τήν φύσιν εἶναι ἑκάστου, ὥσπερ ἀνθρώπου, etc.; see the examples in Bonitz's index under the word. Cf. Winers Grammar, § 31, 6a.)).
d. the sum of innate properties and powers by which one person differs from others, distinctive native peculiarities, natural characteristics: φύσις θηρίων (the natural strength, ferocity and intractability of beasts (A. V. (every) kind of beasts)), ἡ φύσις ἡ ἀνθρωπίνῃ (the ability, art, skill, of men, the qualities which are proper to their nature and necessarily emanate from it), James 3:7 (cf. Winer's Grammar, § 31, 10); θείας κοινωνοί φύσεως, (the holiness distinctive of the divine nature is specially referred to), 2 Peter 1:4 (Ἀμενωφει ... θείας δοκουντι μετεσχηκεναι φύσεως κατά τέ σοφίαν καί πρόγνωσιν τῶν, ἐσομενων, Josephus, contra Apion 1, 26).

Strong's Greek: 5449. φύσις (phusis) -- nature