Posted on 09/14/2002 11:27:48 AM PDT by Itsfreewill
My friend and I stood looking down at his tiny newborn baby, lying contentedly in his crib. "Of course," said my friend, "our little Tommy is a sinner."
These words were a continuation of the doctrine my friend had taught earlier in his Sunday school class: a doctrine that is accepted as orthodoxy almost universally in our churches, the doctrine that all of humanity sinned in Adam when he ate the forbidden fruit, that Adam's sin, its guilt, and its curse were imputed to all his descendants, and that all of his descendants are now born with an Adamic sin nature which makes sin unavoidable and makes us "by nature the children of wrath."
What makes this incredible doctrine believable is the fact that there are verses in the Bible which seem to teach it. Psalm 51:5 comes immediately to the mind of the Christian who has been taught to believe in the doctrine of original sin: "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." This settles it for the Christian. If the Bible says we were "shapen in iniquity" and "conceived in sin," then it has to be so.
And the above text would teach that men are born sinners if it were meant to be taken literally. But the language of this text is not literal, it is figurative. Both context and reality demand a figurative interpretation of this text.
For example, let's compare Psalm 51:5 with Job 1:21, which says: "Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither." If Psalm 51:5 can be interpreted literally to teach the doctrine that David and all other men are born sinners, then Job 1:21 can be interpreted literally to teach the doctrine that Job and all other men will some day go back into their mother's womb.
Neither Psalm 51:5 nor Job 1:21 is to be understood literally. They are both figurative expressions. Both context and our knowledge of reality demand a figurative interpretation of these two texts.
David uses figurative language throughout his Psalms. In fact, in the 51st Psalm, verses five, seven, and eight are all figurative expressions. So if verse five can be made to teach that men are born sinners, then verse seven can be made to teach that hyssop cleanses us from sin when it says, "Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean." Also, verse eight can be made to teach the doctrine that God breaks the Christian's bones when he sins, and that his broken bones rejoice when he is forgiven "Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice." Another of David's Psalms, Psalm 58:3, can be made to teach the astonishing doctrine that babies speak from the very moment they are born: "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies."
But who would seriously teach from this last text that babies actually do speak as soon as they are born? None of these passages is meant to be understood in a literal sense. They are all figurative expressions. If they were understood literally, they would all teach what we know to be contrary to reality; for reality teaches us that bones don't rejoice, hyssop doesn't purge sin, babies don't speak as soon as they leave the womb, and an unborn child is not morally depraved.
The same rules of interpretation that would permit Psalm 51:5 to teach that babies are born sinners, would, if applied to these passages (or if applied to many other passages in the Bible), allow for every kind of perversion and wild interpretation of God's Word. Look again at the words of Job 1:21: "Naked came I out of my mother's womb, and naked shall I return thither." Did Job, by these words, mean to teach that he and all other men would some day go back into their mother's womb? We know that such a meaning is absurd. But it is just as reasonable to give to Job 1:21 the nonsensical meaning that Job and all other men will some day go back into their mother's womb, as it is to give to Psalm 51:5 the nonsensical meaning that David and all other men are born sinners. David was not teaching in this passage that he was born a sinner. He instead was confessing to God the awful guilt and sinfulness of his heart, and he cried out to God in strong language the language of figure and symbol to express that awful guilt and sinfulness.
But if David intended to affirm that he was literally "shapen in iniquity and conceived in sin," then he affirmed absolute nonsense, and he charged his Creator with making him a sinner; for David knew that God was his Maker:
Thy hands have made me and fashioned me. Psalm 119:73
You made all the delicate, inner parts of my body, and knit them together in my mother's womb. Psalm 139:13 (Living Bible)
Know ye that the Lord he is God: It is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves. Psalm 100:3
Are we to understand from these passages that God fashions men into sinners in their mother's womb? No, we know that God does not create sinners. Yet, upon the supposition that Psalm 51:5 teaches that men are born sinners, these texts could teach nothing else. Who cannot see that the doctrine that men are born sinners charges God with creating sinners? It represents man as being formed a sinner in his mother's womb, when the Bible clearly teaches that God forms man in his mother's womb. It represents man as coming into this world a sinner, when the Bible clearly teaches that God creates all men. It may be objected that God created only Adam and Eve, and that the rest of mankind descended from them by natural generation. But this objection does not relieve the doctrine of an inherited sin nature of its slander and libel of the character of God. For if man has a sinful nature at birth, who is it who established the laws of procreation under which he would be born with that nature? God, of course. There is no escaping the logical inference that is implicit in the doctrine of an inherited sin nature. It is a blasphemous and slanderous libel on the character of God.
But one might as well reject the Bible out of hand, if he does not want to recognize that God is the Creator of all men. For the fact that God is the Creator of all men is one of the clearest truths taught in the Bible.
Thy hands have made me and fashioned me. Psalm 119:73
Thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee: for I am fearfully and wonderfully made. Psalm 139:13, 14
Did not he that made me in the womb make him? and did not one fashion us in the womb? Job 31:15
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee. Jer. 1:5
Have we not all one father? Hath not one God created us? Mal. 2:10
Remember now thy Creator in the days of thy youth. Eccl. 12:1
Know ye that the Lord he is God; it is he that hath made us and not we ourselves. Psalm 100:3
I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth...for it repenteth me that I have made them. Gen. 6:7
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness...So God created man in his image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. Gen. 1:26,27
Ye are gods; and all of you are the children of the most High. Psalm 82:6
For in the image of God made he man. Gen. 9:6
Man is the image and glory of God. I Cor. 11:7
Men are made after the similitude of God. James 3:9
The Lord formeth the spirit of man within him. Zech. 12:1
The Spirit of God hath made me, and the breath of the Almighty hath given me life. Job 33:4
He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things. Acts 17:25
We are the offspring of God. Acts 17:29
I am the root and the offspring of David. Rev. 22:16
Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions. Eccl. 7:29
This last text not only declares that God has created man, but it also affirms that God created man upright. If man is created upright, he cannot be born a sinner; and if he is born a sinner, he cannot be created upright. Either one or the other may be true, but they cannot both be true for the two are contradictories.
But when God says he "created us in his image, and gave us life and breath and all things," are we to understand that he created us as sinners? When he says, "We are his offspring," are we to understand that his offspring are born sinners? When Jesus said, "I am the root and the offspring of David," are we to understand that David sprang forth from the root Christ Jesus with a sinful nature? Or, are we to understand that Jesus, as the offspring of David, was born with a sinful nature? The very fact that Jesus was a man, descended from Adam, and born with a human nature as we are, shows that men are not born with a sinful nature. I John 4:3, II John 7, Heb. 2:14, Heb. 2:16-18, Heb. 4:15, Rom. 1:3, Matt. 1:1, Luke 3:38.
The doctrine of original sin is false: it slanders and libels the character of God, it shocks man's god-given consciousness of justice, and it flies in the face of the plainest teachings of God's holy Word. The doctrine of original sin is not a Bible doctrine. It is a grotesque myth that contradicts the Bible on almost every page. But because good Christians can quote texts from the Bible to "prove" the doctrine of original sin, they are convinced it is true. But good Christians have rejected truth and clung to error in the name of the Bible before.
For instance, Galileo and Copernicus brought to the church the truth that the earth was not the center of the universe, that the sun did not go around the earth but that the earth went around the sun and that the earth rotated on its axis, giving the illusion that the sun was going around the earth.
We all know this to be true now, but did all good Christians believe it then? No, both John Calvin and Martin Luther clung, along with the church, to the error that the earth was the center of the universe, that the sun went around the earth and that the earth stood still.
"Martin Luther called Copernicus 'an upstart astrologer' and a 'fool who wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy.' Calvin thundered: 'Who will venture to place the authority of Copernicus above that of the Holy Spirit? Do not the Scriptures say that Joshua commanded the sun and not the earth to stand still? That the sun runs from one end of the heavens to the other?'"
Both Calvin and Luther were good, well-meaning men, but they still clung to their false views because they could quote Scripture texts to support them. Likewise, there are good, well-meaning Christians today who also erroneously cling to the doctrine of original sin because they can quote texts from the Bible to "prove" it.
It is these texts, that have been taken out of context and misinterpreted to support this false doctrine, that we will examine in the next chapter.
Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me. Psalm 51:5
The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies. Psalm 58:3
And were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. Eph. 2:3
Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? Not one. Job 14:4
What is man that he should be clean, and he that is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? Job 15:14
Wherefore, 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...Therefore 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. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Rom. 5:12, 18, 19
And that is my understanding, too, of what the EO church says...where we are expected to see ourselves as the worst of sinners.
No hank if it was against his nature he would have to work at it..he does not he loves his sin..
Well, that's what you say, but the Bible says:
Prov 13:15 ... the way of transgressors is hard.
And if it were not hard work to sin, why would coming to Jesus be considered rest?
Math. 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
The Bible describes sin as slavery and servitude. Who loves being a slave?
John 8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
Rom. 6:16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
If it was our nature to sin, it would be good for us to sin. It is my nature that requires me to eat. It is good for me to eat. It is my nature that requires me to breath. It is good for me to breath. But sin is bad for us, because it is contrary to the nature that God has given us. Everywhere the Bible teaches that sin is contrary to nature.
Rom 1:26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature.
Sin is always "against" nature.
Rom. 2:14-15 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 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another.
So God says, men, by nature, have the law of God written on their hearts. Those who have God's law on their hearts do not hate it. The must choose to reject that law naturally written on their heart. To sin, a man must go against his own nature, the nature God gave him.
1 Cor. 11:14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him?
The nature we are born with instructs us in righteousness. We have to reject it to sin.
This, mom, is what is so evil about sin. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God, not because their nature makes them sinners, but because they wickedly choose to disobey, when God has made every provision, even in their nature, to prevent them from sinning.
If men were sinners because God made them that way, justice would require God provide a Savior. It is because men sin willing, against the nature God has provided that salvation is by Grace.
The "sinful nature" heresy turns everything on its head. It makes God responsible for sin, not man.
Mom, you believe little children are sinners because they were born that way. Jesus said, "... Verily I say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." Mat. 18:3
Hank
That was writen to the saved Hank...it was about the grace of God enabling the saved to perserve ...it was not about law keeping .Every good work is not perfect law keeping Hank
Well, first of all, I thought I was talking to someone that is saved. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Then you said: "it was not about law keeping." It isn't!? That what meaneth this:
Ro 8:3-4 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
Are you an antinomian?
Hank
"The Lord does not say that it is blessed to know something about God, but rather to possess God in oneself." (Saint Gregory of Nyssa, about the 4th century.)
The EO church teaches, and I believe this also, that the possession of God within the mind and *heart* is the true knowledge of God. This could be what you are referring to as superstition?
I think this is a better explanation of where we stand in the EO church. :-)
From here.
And that is my understanding, too, of what the EO church says...where we are expected to see ourselves as the worst of sinners.
I have always wondered why most Christians who believe in the sinful nature do not see that it mitigates agains guilt. If it is the nature you are born with that is the cause of your sin, how can one be responsible for it. This reasoning does not work with them, however.
I'm glad to see you weren't offended by my frank expression regarding the EO view of faith. This raises a question in my mind. If you don't mind, what EO church are you associated with?
Hank
Yes, His nature was righteous, ours is not.
He's Eastern Orthodox. (shrugs) They've botched this one rather badly, I'm afraid (JMHO). See your #36... unresponded, as yet.
Ahhhemmmm.... lots of expositors have taught lots of different things.
The relevant question is will any Fallen Men ever Repent and Believe and Confess absent the prior Regeneration of their Spirits?
The Biblical Doctrine of Man is quite clear on the matter:
The Natural Man is evil and spiritually insane in his heart (Ecc 9) and can never perform the good (Jeremiah 13) and only chooses unrighteous choices (Isa 64) and will never come to the Light (John 3) and cannot receive the Spirit (John 14) and never actions righteous choices (Rom 3) and always and without exception wills Evil (Rom 7) and never selects the God-pleasing Choice (Rom 8) and cannot even understand the Gospel (1 Cor 2) and cannot confess Jesus as Lord (1 Cor 12).
Given, then, that this is the state of the unregenerate Man's heart according to every single passage concerning the Biblical Doctrine of Man, his heart must be unilaterally re-engineered by God in order to Repent.
Fortunately, God directs the hearts of Men in whatever direction He wants to turn them. (Proverbs 21:1)
I have heard the word "superstitious" before, and I can certainly see why it is common.
We attend primarily the American Orthodox church in Seattle, but we also attend here and there at the local Russian and Serbian churches. They are all one and the same except in language used, with the exception of some rare start-ups who like the sound of the word "orthodox" apparently.
I suspect many find that even when they repent and remain holy as best they are able, they discover later they have stumbled again, frequently willingly and foolishly into sin. BTW, not all sins are against 'nature'. There are also sins against the Creator and other persons, laws and objects.
Well RnMomof7 said:
Gen 5:3And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat [a son] in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:
Notice the children of Adam (us) were made not after the image of the Father from that day forward we were after the image of man. Which wild imagination is flatly contradicted by Paul.
1 Cor 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.
Jas 3:9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.
[Of course, since men are not longer in the similitude of God, but of men, go ahead an curse them all you want. (2 RnMomof7 3:6)]
No point in responding to the rest.
Hank
Rom. 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
1 Cor. 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:
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.
Phil. 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith.
1 John 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight.
(I am curious how you would interpret this last verse.)
Hank
Oh, you are so right. There is nothing better than having the time to be emersed in God's Word. It is what I always long for, just as you do. It is too bad we do not always have the time for it, but I willingly sacrifice other things for that opportunity.
By the way, do you watch TV?
Hank
On Genesis 5 Wesley says
Verse 3. Seth was born in the 130th year of Adam's life, and probably the murder of Abel was not long before. Many other sons and daughters were born to Adam besides Cain and Abel before this; but no notice is taken of them, because an honourable mention must be made of his name only, in whose loins Christ and the church were. But that which is most observable here concerning Seth, is, that Adam begat him in his own likeness after his image - Adam was made in the image of God; but when he was fallen and corrupted, he begat a son in his own image, sinful and defiled, frail and mortal, and miserable like himself; not only a man like himself, consisting of body and soul; but a sinner like himself, guilty and obnoxious, degenerate and corrupt. He was conceived and born in sin, Psalm li, 5. This was Adam's own likeness, the reverse of that Divine likeness in which Adam was made; but having lost it himself he could not convey it to his seed.
Matthew Henery notes
II. The birth of his son Seth, v. 3. He was born in the hundred and thirtieth year of Adam's life; and probably the murder of Abel was not long before. Many other sons and daughters were born to Adam, besides Cain and Abel, before this; but no notice is taken of them, because an honourable mention must be made of his name only in whose loins Christ and the church were. But that which is most observable here concerning Seth is that Adam begat him in his own likeness, after his image. Adam was made in the image of God; but, when he was fallen and corrupt, he begat a son in his own image, sinful and defiled, frail, mortal, and miserable, like himself; not only a man like himself, consisting of body and soul, but a sinner like himself, guilty and obnoxious, degenerate and corrupt. Even the man after God's own heart owns himself conceived and born in sin, Ps. 51:5. This was Adam's own likeness, the reverse of that divine likeness in which Adam was made; but, having lost it himself, he could not convey it to his seed. Note, Grace does not run in the blood, but corruption does. A sinner begets a sinner, but a saint does not beget a saint.
Calvin
Verse 3. And begat a son in his own likeness . We have lately said that Moses traces the offspring of Adam only through the line of Seth, to propose for our consideration the succession of the Church. In saying that Seth begat a son after his own image, he refers in part to the first origin of our nature: at the same time its corruption and pollution is to be noticed, which having been contracted by Adam through the fall, has flowed down to all his posterity. If he had remained upright, he would have transmitted to all his children what he had received: but now we read that Seth, as well as the rest, was defiled; because Adams who had fallen from his original state, could beget none but such as were like himself. If any one should object that Seth with his family had been elected by the special grace of God: the answer is easy and obvious; namely, that a supernatural remedy does not prevent carnal generation from participating in the corruption of sin. Therefore, according to the flesh, Seth was born a sinner; but afterwards he was renewed by the grace of the Spirit. This sad instance of the holy patriarch furnishes us with ample occasion to deplore our own wretchedness.
Hank we maintained our similariity to God, we are after all fashioned like Him in our tripart nature But Jesus said it well
Jhn 8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
Hank that is whyt we need to be born again...that part of us that is made for eternity looks like Adam ...not like God..We need to be born again....
Well see that's what happens when you quote a bunch of men instead of Scripture.
I your quote were true, this verse would not be: Rom 5:20 ... where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.
Personally, I'll go with Scriputre. You can go with your theologians if you like.
Hank
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.