SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Adam's sin...our guilt?

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 Next Page )
PosterThread
ceedub
Member



Joined: 2009/5/1
Posts: 215
Canada

 Adam's sin...our guilt?

I'm brand new here but this looks like a great place to discuss. I'm curious if there's any others out there who have a problem as I do with the extent that some (even many commentators that I really admire) take the doctrine of original sin to. By that, I understand that there is a far reaching effect that includes death, the sin nature and imminent condemnation but for the grace of God. But too many passages indicate that God doesn't pass guilt until we ourselves sin.

I understand and agree with Cov't headship, but not to the degree that we are held guilty for the same crimes committed by the head. ie: Germans under Hitler were judged with many consequences that their leader brought them under, yet no one would hold them individually guilty for the same crimes.

I'm speaking on Romans 5:12 -21 in the near future and was wondering if there were any thoughts on this widely disputed topic?

 2009/5/1 16:40Profile
sojourner7
Member



Joined: 2007/6/27
Posts: 1573
Omaha, NE

 Re: Adam's sin...our guilt?

Since all have descended from Adam; we all have
inherited his nature toward sin. God has given
to men the will to choose; but we by nature do
not choose God's ways and God's will!!


_________________
Martin G. Smith

 2009/5/1 16:47Profile
ceedub
Member



Joined: 2009/5/1
Posts: 215
Canada

 Re:

As I said, I agree entirely with the effect on Adam's posterity of the inherited sin nature. But when the books are opened at the great throne judgement, it is our 'deeds' that are judged (outside of Christ) to condemnation, not Adam's deed. Consider the parable of the 'sour grapes' that God forbid Israel to use anymore. 'The SOUL that SINS shall die' seems to indicate a need for personal transgression before actual GUILT will be assessed by God. I know as a consequence of Adam's sin death came upon all men, but guilt?

Why did God allow those under a certain age to enter the promised land? It seems that though they were judged in a general sense with Israel, they were not held personally responsible for the sins of their fathers.

If a police pulled you over and issued you a ticket for speeding before you actually did, citing the fact that you have a sin nature and assuredly will at some point, though you'd agree with his assessment, would that ticket indicting you for personal guilt of the offence be just?

 2009/5/1 16:54Profile
fuehrerbe21
Member



Joined: 2008/10/21
Posts: 151
Wisconsin

 Re: Adam's sin...our guilt?

Quote:
ie: Germans under Hitler were judged with many consequences that their leader brought them under, yet no one would hold them individually guilty for the same crimes.



But they were guilty nonetheless. If you are guilty of sin, no matter what type of sin, you are guilty. Because God is holy, he can't be in the presence of any type of sin. Therefore, we will be judged and if it weren't for the blood of the Lamb, we would be condemned.

Quote:
But too many passages indicate that God doesn't pass guilt until we ourselves sin.



Would you subscribe to the understanding that newborns, infants, or even children are not sinful?

All have sinned and fall short of God's glorious standard.


_________________
Ben Fuehrer

 2009/5/1 16:57Profile
ceedub
Member



Joined: 2009/5/1
Posts: 215
Canada

 Re:

I wouldn't disagree that infants are sinful, but I would assert that upon conception (life beginning) the newborn has not sinned (active tense) nor would there be 'any deeds done in the flesh' by which that newborn could be judged by, citing God's revealed standard for judgement.

I have trouble believing that 2 moments after conception, should I miscarry, I need be sent to an eternal torment for what Adam did.

I am a strong believer in original sin and all that it carries (death, nature etc.) yet I don't see scripture saying that Adam's guilt for his personal transgression carries to us. Death yes, but not guilt. I don't believe a conceived newborn is guilty and worthy of hell.

Is it a mercy when God takes a life before they can sin?

 2009/5/1 17:04Profile









 Re:



[b]All of us sin (by thought and or deed)and fall short of the glory of God.[/b]

All of us are descended from Adam, and in Adam all sin. All of us are either in the first Adam, or in the last Adam, Jesus Christ. All of us are conceived in sin, and have inherited the sin nature of Adam.

(1 Cor 15:22)
For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

He who knew no sin became sin for us!
2 Cor 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him


In the Old Testament, when God set up the Sacrifical System as a type of the final Sacrifice for all sin, Jesus Christ, the sacrifices He created are as follows:

If you were a Jew, living at the time of the Tabernacle, or later living at the time of the Temple, you had to sacrifice animals to "cover" your sins. Actually the blood of the animal sacrifices was applied to "cover" your sins. The sins were not not taken away, they were only covered until Messiah would come to take away all sin, for all time, for those who believe on Him.

[b]Mandatory[/b] Sacrifices were:

1. The SIN Offering (Sacrifice) -for our sin nature.

2. The TRESPASS Offering (Sacrifice)- for known and unknown sins.

There were 3 other Sacrifices that were [b]VOLUNTARY[/b] sacrifices (offerings). You would participate in these sacrifices to God because you wanted a closer walk with HIM. These sacrifices were:

3.The Burnt Offering (Sacrifice)

4..The Meal Offering (actually part ot the Burnt offering, ie Sacrifice),

5. The PEACE offering (Sacrifice)

In only the Peace offering was the offerer (the sinner) allowed to eat the sacrifice, and it had to be completely eaten within 3 days.

Also, all sacrifices were salted.

Another thing to consider, that bares witness to our inherited sin nature:

1 Cor 15:50
Now I say this, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does the perishable inherit the imperishable.

Until we receive our new glorified bodies of flesh and bone, just like the resurrected body of jesus Christ, we cannot be in the presence of God. The reason, we are sinners by nature, and our hearts are deceitfully wicked. Also, our bodies consist of flesh and blood.

Behold My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see, for a spirit does not have [b]flesh and bones[/b] as you see I have.” (Luke 24:39)

Sincerely,

Walter

Quote:

ceedub wrote:
I wouldn't disagree that infants are sinful, but I would assert that upon conception (life beginning) the newborn has not sinned (active tense) nor would there be 'any deeds done in the flesh' by which that newborn could be judged by, citing God's revealed standard for judgement.

I have trouble believing that 2 moments after conception, should I miscarry, I need be sent to an eternal torment for what Adam did.

I am a strong believer in original sin and all that it carries (death, nature etc.) yet I don't see scripture saying that Adam's guilt for his personal transgression carries to us. Death yes, but not guilt. I don't believe a conceived newborn is guilty and worthy of hell.

Is it a mercy when God takes a life before they can sin?

 2009/5/1 18:00
theopenlife
Member



Joined: 2007/1/30
Posts: 926


 Re: Adam's sin...our guilt?

Hi, ceedub. Glad to have you joining us here.

Romans 5:12 says, "death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." Death is a consequence of personal sin, as evidenced by the use of "for." The logical flow is that, if not all had sinned, not all would die.

Human mortality is a sign of personal sin - "death... for all have sinned." Only sinful humans die, and all humans die. Even infants die, often prior to discernible self-awareness. Thus I believe the imputation of Adam's sin and the corrupt nature passed to all men is such as merits wrath, apart from any subsequent individual acts of trespass. The guilt applies to infants, et al, though God is free to show grace to whom He will. God regenerated John the Baptist while yet in the womb.

May I ask another question?

All humans sin in noticeable ways from a very early age. Do they receive these habits by example, or are sinful inclinations a part of their nature? I think we agree, their very nature is inclined to all manner of sin.

Is the nature something other than the essence of the person? Can we think of ourselves apart from our nature, or is that not a description of who we are? And if that nature is sinful, is the person not then guilty regardless of their self-awareness of sin?

I would submit that the very nature of a person born in Adam is corrupt. "We were by nature children of wrath," [Eph 2:3] that is, we were under wrath from our personal genesis because of the nature we possessed. Without having consciously committed sins, we were nonetheless sinful beings.

Like an acorn which is always and only in the process of becoming an oak, and never another sort of tree, even so all men begin as sinners and grow into monsters of iniquity. The first bud and blossoms may hardly be apparent, but the sinful nature of the plant is enough to be culpable.

The only reason an infant may not commit intentional sin is that he is not developed enough to do so: the will to sin is present before the means are, and God judges the heart as well the outward actions.

To quote John Wesley,

Quote:

" (6.) He expressly says, ' We were children of wrath even as others, by nature,' or from our birth. He does not say, We became so by education, or by imitation, or by custom in sinning; but, to show us when it is that we commence sinners, by what means we become ' children of wrath,' whence it is that we are so prone to evil from our infancy, and to imitate bad rather than good examples, he says,' We were children of wrath by nature:' we were born fallen creatures; we came into the world sinners, and, as such, liable to wrath, in consequence of the fell of our first father."

" And yet it is allowed, we are not so guilty by nature, as a course of actual sin afterward makes us. But we are, antecedent to that course, ' children of wrath ;' liable to some degree of wrath and punishment. Here, then, from a plain text, taken in its obvious sense, we have a clear evidence both of what divines term, original sin imputed, and of original sin inherent. The former is the sin of Adam, so far reckoned ours as to constitute us in some degree guilty ; the latter, a want of original righteousness, and a corruption of nature; whence it is, that from our infancy we are averse to what Is good, and propense to what is evil." (p. 33.)"

 2009/5/1 18:24Profile
Miccah
Member



Joined: 2007/9/13
Posts: 1752
Wisconsin

 Re:


ceedub wrote:

Quote:


I am a strong believer in original sin and all that it carries (death, nature etc.) yet I don't see scripture saying that Adam's guilt for his personal transgression carries to us. Death yes, but not guilt. I don't believe a conceived newborn is guilty and worthy of hell.

Is it a mercy when God takes a life before they can sin?




Welcome for SI!


God is soverign. He can and does as He pleases.


But to base someone's salvation (i.e. children in aborted in the womb, miscariages, etc...) on another person's sin/actions is pure false teaching.

I strongly believe that the Lord did not make people for wrath based on His word alone. To be fair, there are schools of thought both ways, but I will error on the side of the Lord's mercy and grace each time.

Blessings. :-)


_________________
Christiaan

 2009/5/1 19:26Profile
ginnyrose
Member



Joined: 2004/7/7
Posts: 7470
Mississippi

 Re:

ceedub,
Welcome to SI!

In reading your questions, I sense there must be a situation troubling you that you are asking these questions...right? or wrong?

Blessings,
ginnyrose


_________________
Sandra Miller

 2009/5/1 21:26Profile
ceedub
Member



Joined: 2009/5/1
Posts: 215
Canada

 Re:

So from your reply I take Eph 2:3 to read...

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.

The verse you quoted in defense of imputed guilt through Adam actually says the opposite. It speaks of our 'conversation', it says we were 'fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind' even as others. I think the 'children of wrath' Paul speaks of here are obviously those who have transgressed God's law and therefore worthy of wrath. These 'children' have some 'deeds done in the flesh' to answer for.

I did try at the early posts to make it totally clear I believe that through Adam we inherit the sin nature. But when you make the comment...

Human mortality is a sign of personal sin - "death... for all have sinned." Only sinful humans die, and all humans die. Even infants die, often prior to discernible self-awareness. Thus I believe the imputation of Adam's sin and the corrupt nature passed to all men is such as merits wrath, apart from any subsequent individual acts of trespass.

How then do you explain Christ's death who knew no sin? Does there need to be personal sin to die? (In advance I'm fully aware of the doctrine of the atonement and the wrath of the Father for the sins of God's people)

If Christ could die who never sinned, can a new life moments after conception?

Again, the question is specifically, 'What are God's scriptural guidelines for guilt as opposed to 'death in Adam' which we inherit?

 2009/5/1 21:36Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy