Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: jo kus
I agree, but our originally created nature is not the same as it is AFTER the original sin, correct?

It's not the same. Before it had a potential to be perfect or defective. Now it's defective, but with God's love and the Son's redepmtive sacrifice we can have been given that potential again. However, not without God help because we are already "wounded."

I will agree - the OT originally held such a concept, but the development of theology did away with this concept later and attributed sin primarily to the individual

Jo, the OT is where the sin is established as that of an individual and nto soemthing another man can atone for.

"Every one shall be put to death for his own sin." [Deut 24:16 LXX]; see also 2 Kin 14:6, 2 Chron 25:4, and especially

True, infants are not personal sinners. But it would seem strange that St. Cyprian, for example, would say infant baptism was given for the remission of sins

I would say that St. Cyrprian very much believed in the western concpet of the "original sin" and that perhpas he had some influence on St. Augustine in his beliefs.

8,191 posted on 06/08/2006 11:26:21 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8186 | View Replies ]


To: kosta50
Now it's defective, but with God's love and the Son's redepmtive sacrifice we can have been given that potential again. However, not without God help because we are already "wounded."

I can agree with that! Even here, we begin to achieve theosis, to share in the divine nature of God. We can even love our enemies!

Jo, the OT is where the sin is established as that of an individual and nto soemthing another man can atone for.

Normally, but the Suffering Servant passages talk about vicarious suffering, do they not?

I would say that St. Cyrprian very much believed in the western concpet of the "original sin" and that perhpas he had some influence on St. Augustine in his beliefs.

I would say that is true. I don't want to speculate on why the West had different views on "redemption" and the atonement, but I would say the cultures had something to do with it. When we approach Scriptures, we bring our baggage along with it, even our secular views on things. Perhaps there is good reason to point to the Old Roman way of looking at law and order? What is interesting is that Western society still seems to hold the English view of law (literal sense, with precedents established) rather than the European view of law (more subject to the judge's decision with precedent considered secondarily).

What is interesting, and most people don't realize, is that Western Canon Law is based on European Law, and is much more flexible than English Law.

But now I ramble...

Regards

8,195 posted on 06/08/2006 11:45:04 AM PDT by jo kus (There is nothing colder than a Christian who doesn't care for the salvation of others - St.Crysostom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8191 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson