I do not believe that Augustine was fully correct and I do believe that Pelagius was more of an heretic. We cannot stop sinning by our own power, but only by God's grace and help. But God has also given us the ability to say no to sin and yes to Him. But it is by His grace this can be accomplished. Ausgustine was wrong when he taught that sin is in our body. It is not a part of our body, but our nature is depraved and corrupted by the Fall and sins committed. But thank God we can be free from sin. Jesus said "Go and sin no more." John said, "Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world."
Regardless of who teaches truth, truth is still truth. We must be holy. Heb. 12:14 says "without holiness, no man shall see the Lord" God said, "Be ye holy, for I am holy."

_________________
James

JonMarie

Augustine believed in imputed righteousness which means that we can do whatever we want and we will still be saved as we will sin till we die. Pelagius believed that man is born innocent, there is a very weak scriptural case for original sin, but from what I understand, he believed that every man will fall when they reach the age of accountability and then need saving from sin. Furthermore, it is the only possible explanation for Augstine having a doctrinal debate with another theologian....I repeat why would Augustine do this with a man who believed that man on his own can be right with God through his own efforts. What do you call a man who says this? Not a Christian.

I do not believe the consensus on this issue. I do not believe what Augustine wanted the world to believe hence his destruction of Pelagiuses work so that we could decide for ourselves.

Your interpretation of Romans 7 is the one that Augustine held until he had to submit to Pelagius on verse 22. If Paul is talking of himself before he came to Christ then the other times he says that he was blameless as regards the law as a Jew are nonsense.

In order to understand the issue one must grasp the only three interpretations possible on this chapter. Augustine held your view then switched, not to the view of Pelagius which was to my understanding that the man is a believer serving in the flesh who has come to the spiritual crisis known as entire sanctification but to the view held by many Cavinists that it is the normal experience of the Christian.

blessings
Brenda

JB1968,

I am in agreement with your comments.

Krautfrau: "Augustine believed in imputed righteousness which means that we can do whatever we want and we will still be saved as we will sin till we die."

I do not see that as evidenced by the outward 180 degree change in Augustine's behavior. Furthermore why do you assume that when Augustine said we will sin till we die, that he was talking about sins of commission, rather than sins of omission? Do you believe that as one grows in holiness so likewise does ones sin consciousness?

Krautfrau: "Pelagius believed that man is born innocent, there is a very weak scriptural case for original sin,..."

??? Consider the following;

Romans 5:18-20
18Therefore 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.
19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.

1 Corinthians 15:44-46
44It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.

Romans 5:11-13
11And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.
12Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Krautfrau: "...but from what I understand, he believed that every man will fall when they reach the age of accountability and then need saving from sin."

There is no scriptural evidence to substantiate that point.

Krautfrau:" Furthermore, it is the only possible explanation for Augstine having a doctrinal debate with another theologian....I repeat why would Augustine do this with a man who believed that man on his own can be right with God through his own efforts. What do you call a man who says this? Not a Christian."

Perhaps that offers insight as to why most of Pelagius' work was destroyed.

Krautfrau: "I do not believe the consensus on this issue."

We are all entitled to our own opinions and to believe as we wish to.

Krautfrau: "I do not believe what Augustine wanted the world to believe hence his destruction of Pelagiuses work so that we could decide for ourselves."

God has ensured that His Word will be preserved for us. The only important issue regarding any doctrinal teachings of Pelagius or Augustine is whether they line up with the truth of scripture. Since the volume of manuscripts that exist to substantiate the teachings of Pelagius are nominal it does not seem worthwhile to focus on Pelagius or his teachings, in that God gave us the Bible. Or Augustine for that matter. Why should we be concerning ourselves with what Pelagius or Augustine said, rather than with what Jesus, Paul, John, Matthew, Mark, Luke, Peter, James, and others have declared, that has been preserved over the centuries in the Bible and substantiated by thousands of manuscripts? In other words, why should we choose to speculate when the facts are before us?

Thank you Brenda for your responses.
JonMarie

Original sin is taught in the Bible. Consider also when David said, "In sin did my mother conceive me." Psalm 51:5.
Job 14:1 "Man that is born of a woman is of few days and full of trouble."
Because of original sin, this does not give us an excuse to sin. This Bible says that the "soul that sinneth, it shall die." Ezekiel 18:20
The Bible does teach imputed righteousness and also imparted righteousness. We are made righteous because of what Christ has done for us and then His righteousness is imparted to us experientually. Romans 4:11 and following. Also James 2:23. 2 Peter 1:4.

_________________
James

JB1968: "Original sin is taught in the Bible. Consider also when David said, "In sin did my mother conceive me." Psalm 51:5."

What did David mean by "In sin did my mother conceive me."
Did he have a different mother from his brothers?

JB1968: "Because of original sin, this does not give us an excuse to sin. This Bible says that the "soul that sinneth, it shall die." Ezekiel 18:20"

Romans 6:22-23
22But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

23For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

An excuse to sin. If one is looking for that, it reveals that the desire for sin is greater than one's love for God, and that the heart desires sin more than it desires relationship with God. To love God, is to hate sin.

JB1968: "The Bible does teach imputed righteousness and also imparted righteousness."

?

im·pute
–verb (used with object),-put·ed, -put·ing.
1.
to attribute or ascribe: The children imputed magical powers to the old woman.
2.
to attribute or ascribe (something discreditable), as to a person.
3.
Law. to ascribe to or charge (a person) with an act or quality because of the conduct of another over whom one has control or for whose acts or conduct one is responsible.
4.
Theology. to attribute (righteousness, guilt, etc.) to a person or persons vicariously; ascribe as derived from another.
5.
Obsolete. to charge (a person) with fault.

vi·car·i·ous
   /vaɪˈkɛəriəs, vɪ-/ Show Spelled[vahy-kair-ee-uhs, vi-] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
performed, exercised, received, or suffered in place of another: vicarious punishment.
2.
taking the place of another person or thing; acting or serving as a substitute.
3.
felt or enjoyed through imagined participation in the experience of others: a vicarious thrill.

JB1968: " We are made righteous because of what Christ has done for us and then His righteousness is imparted to us experientually. Romans 4:11 and following. Also James 2:23. 2 Peter 1:4."

Rom 4: 21And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

22And THEREFORE it was imputed to him for righteousness.

23Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;

24But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

JonMarie

"What did David mean by "In sin did my mother conceive me."

This verse which is the only one which can be used for proponents of original sin is not clear, it could easily be saying that it was the mother of David who was the sinner. There is no denying that all sin, we all fall, and that day we die spiritually and need a Saviour. Scriptures teaches that each man is accountable for his own sin, not that of another. The sin of Adam is passed down because through him it entered the world (Eve was deceived and did not sin deliberately but Adam did.)

If the holiness of Christ is imparted to us then we will be holy as He is holy. This means that we will walk without sin and sin will separate us from Him. Yes it is imputed to us but must be imparted too but most walk as though it ihas not been imparted. Can you explain why?

blessings
Brenda

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible
Psalms 51:5

David's sin, Of course, the idea here is not to cast reflections on the character of his mother, or to refer to her feelings in regard to his conception and birth, but the design is to express his deep sense of his own depravity; a depravity so deep as to demonstrate that it must have had its origin in the very beginning of his existence. The word rendered "I was shapen" - חוללתי cholaletiy - is from a word - חול chul - which means properly, "to turn around, to twist, to whirl;" and then it comes to mean "to twist oneself with pain, to writhe;" and then it is used especially with reference to the pains of childbirth. Isa 13:8; 23:4; 26:18; 66:7-8; Mic 4:10. That is the meaning here. The idea is simply that he was "born" in iniquity; or that he was a sinner when he was born; or that his sin could be traced back to his very birth - as one might say that he was born with a love of music, or with a love of nature, or with a sanguine, a phlegmatic, or a melancholy temperament.

There is not in the Hebrew word any idea corresponding to the word ""shapen,"" as if he had been "formed" or "moulded" in that manner by divine power; but the entire meaning of the word is exhausted by saying that his sin could be traced back to his "very birth;" that it was so deep and aggravated, that it could be accounted for - or that he could express his sense of it - in no other way, than by saying that he was "born a sinner." How that occurred, or how it was connected with the first apostasy in Adam, or how the fact that he was thus born could be vindicated, is not intimated, nor is it alluded to. There is no statement that the sin of another was "imputed" to him; or that he was "responsible" for the sin of Adam; or that he was guilty "on account of" Adam's sin, for on these points the psalmist makes no assertion. It is worthy of remark, further, that the psalmist did not endeavor to "excuse" his guilt on the ground that he was ""born"" in iniquity; nor did he allude to that fact with any purpose of "exculpating" himself. The fact that he was thus born only deepened his sense of his own guilt, or showed the enormity of the offence which was the regular result or outbreak of that carly depravity. The points, therefore, which are established by this expression of the psalmist, so far as the language is designed to illustrate how human nature is conceived, are

(1) that people are born with a propensity to sin; and

(2) that this fact does not excuse us in sin, but rather tends to aggravate and deepen our guilt.

The language goes no further than this in regard to the question of original sin or native depravity. The Septuagint agrees with this interpretation - ιδου γαρ εν ανομιαις συνεληφθην idou gar en anomias sunelefthen. So the Vulgate: in iniquitatibus conceptus sum.

And in sin did my mother conceive me - Margin, as in Hebrew, "warm me." This language simply traces his sin back to the time when he began to exist. The previous expression traced it to "his birth;" this expression goes back to the very beginning of "life;" when there were the first indications of life. The idea is, "as soon as I began to exist I was a sinner; or, I had then a propensity to sin - a propensity, the sad proof and result of which is that enormous act of guilt which I have committed."

_________________
Phillip

Christinyou,

Thank you for your response, it was clear and understandable, and I can accept it as true.

Krautfrau: "This verse which is the only one which can be used for proponents of original sin is not clear,..."

I would not associate this verse with original sin. The verses that did speak of original sin were mentioned in a previous post.

"There is no denying that all sin, we all fall, and that day we die spiritually and need a Saviour."

That day happened before we were born, see the previous verses. The whole of nature demonstrates to us that law of reproduction, that every living thing is made up of cells derived from previously existing cells, which were originally created by our Creator. The bible is very emphatic this point, especially concerning people and generations. Consider verse

Heb 7: 9And as I may so say, Levi also, who receiveth tithes, payed tithes in Abraham.
10For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him.

Krautfrau: "Scriptures teaches that each man is accountable for his own sin, not that of another."

Exodus 20: 5Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
6And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

John 9: 1 As He was passing by, He saw a man blind from birth. 2 His disciples questioned Him: " Rabbi, (A) who sinned, this man (B) or his parents, (C) that he was born blind?" 3 "Neither this man nor his parents sinned," Jesus answered. "[This came about] so that God's works (D) might be displayed in him. (HCSB)

Krautfrau: The sin of Adam is passed down because through him it entered the world"

True.


Krautfrau:"(Eve was deceived and did not sin deliberately but Adam did.)" ??? Nonsense. Gen 3:2And THE WOMAN SAID unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
3But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, GOD HATH SAID YE SHALL NOT eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.

Krautfrau:"If the holiness of Christ is imparted to us then we will be holy as He is holy. This means that we will walk without sin."

1 John 2:3-5 (King James Version)
3And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.


sin separates us from Him.

Krautfrau:"Yes it is imputed to us but must be imparted too"

to be imputed IS to be imparted, intrinsically, actually, in reality.


Krautfrau:" but most walk as though it has not been imparted. Can you explain why?" because to "most" it has not been. 1 John 2:4

Thanks for your comments Brenda.