Quote:
Originally Posted by magprob  I am curious if anyone might have a theroy on Original Sin? There has been so much speculation over hundreds of years and I would like to hear what you think. Thanks  |
Original sin is a bogus concept which started by Agustine of Hippo.
Agustine was refuted by Pelagius. However, Augustine won the side of orthodoxy by riged courts.
Now, anyone who comes against "Original sin"/"sin nature" is labled a heretic. It comes about that no one wants to be called a heretic, so no one will try to refut it, unless they are so bold with conviction as I and others.
The only reason that Pelagius is called a heretic today is because Emperor Honorius was a target of his exhortations against the abuses of wealth and power.
Pelagius chastised the wealthy and powerful, including Emperor Honorius, for their abuses of property and privilege, exhorting them to the Christian virtues of mercy and charity.
Therefore Emperor Honorius willingly came to the assistance of the Augustinians when they had been thoroughly defeated in condemning Pelagius as a heretic themselves.
They had been unable to successfully condemn Pelagius whenever he was present or when allowed to present his defense in writing. Three councils had declared him innocent of heresy. All they had to show for their efforts were Pelagius's condemnation by their own courts and their own chastisement by the Bishop of Rome. Undaunted and disobedient, they appealed to the Roman Emperor Honorius;
In 415 Augustine sent Orosius to Jerome in Palestine with the mission of convicting Pelagius of heresy.
In June 415, a Synod was convened in Jerusalem with Orosius accusing Pelagius of heresy. Pelagius was present to defend himself and was acquitted.
A second council was called in December at Diospolis (Lydda) with two previously deposed Gallic Bishops bringing charges against Pelagius.
Again, he was present to defend himself and, again, he was acquitted.
In a dissatisfied reaction the Augustinians convened two of their own councils in 416 -- at Carthage and Milevum where they condemned both Pelagius and Celestius. Pelagius was not present to defend himself; so of coarse he was condemned because He could not defend himself.
The Augustinians also appealed to Pope Innocent 1 who claimed universal authority for the Bishop of Rome by declaring that nothing done in the provinces could be regarded as finished until it had come to his knowledge. Innocent 1, often referred to as "the first Pope", declared that the Pope's decisions affected "all the churches of the world" and reflects his attempt to exert control over the East as well as the West. The Augustinians successfully persuaded him to issue a conditional condemnation of Pelagius and Celestius on January 27, 417 which would be effective only if they did not return to orthodoxy. However, Innocent I died on March 12 and was replaced by Pope Zosimus I on March 18.
Zosimus was an Eastern Christian who decided to re-examine the case, calling for a Synod at the Basilica of St. Clement in Rome. Pelagius was unable to attend but sent a Confession of Faith which was intended for Innocent 1 (Pelagius being unawares of the previous Pope's death). Zosimus was favorably impressed with Pelagius' defense; Zosimus, after hearing the case from Caelestius and letters from Pelagius, which professed the need for God’s grace, declared Pelagius’ doctrine to be fully orthodox and that he was a man of unconditional faith.
Zosimus went on to say that Pelagius had for many years been outstanding in good works and in service to God; he was theologically sound and never left the catholic faith.
On April 30, 418 Emperor Honorius invoked the power of the state and issued an Imperial Rescript -- a civil document -- ordering action against Pelagius on the charge that public meetings and credulous adolescents affect the peace of Rome.
Augustine put pressure on Zosimus to reconsider his decisions, which would be almost
as big a scandal as Zosimus overturning the decree of Innocent. The pressure went so far as to include the Emperor who pressured Zosimus to change his acquittal of Pelagius.
With the pressures of the Empire on his back as well as the Council of
Carthage passing canons against the teachings of Pelagius, Zosimus caved in to the
pressure and reversed his decision and condemned Pelagius. An ecclesiastical document written by Pope Zosimus followed. It condemned Pelagius as a heretic and banned him from Rome.
The exact reasons why Zosimus reversed his position after the Imperial Rescript are unknown but it was done only after pressure from the Emperor. The text of Zosimus' condemnation is lost and the formal grounds for the condemnation are purely a matter of speculation.
Immediately upon Zosimus' death in 418 two different Bishops were consecrated Pope - Eulalius and Boniface I. Eulalius, like Zosimus, was a Greek. At the Synod of Gangra (Armenia) in 381, Eulalius was among the Bishops who passed Synodical canons in support of the equality of marriage and celibacy and condemned those who denied the legitimacy of the married priesthood.
Both positions were in opposition to the views of the Augustinians. In 419 Eulalius was replaced with the pro-Augustinian Boniface only through the intervention of the Emperor.
It is only a matter of time that when Pelagius dies and not able to defend himself that he would remain accused as a heretic and his doctrines be anathematized (declared heresy).
The Church as been polluted with Augustines Neo-platonic (Neoplatonism) Gnosticism/Manichean theology which the theory of "Original sin"/"sin nature" stems from, it only gives it Christian terms.
You all should listen to "The Hidden Things of God" - Part 1 by Paris Reidhead
http://media.sermonindex.net/1/SID1657.mp3
It explains how the church got into Neo-Platonic Gnostic/Manichean theology through Augustine.
(Information is from Rev. Thomas J. Faulkenbury)
The theory of "Original sin" says that mankind has a so called "sin nature", however, our nature comes from what we are, which is human, and that is to mature and to bear fruit.
Our fruit, weather sin or righteousness comes from what we love or what we put our affections on.
Our own affections effects (not causes) individual choices that we make. The choice that you make will naturally follow your affections, but your affections do not necessitate the decision (your decision may naturally follow your affection, but it does not have to).
Consequently, if you love yourself or the world more than the one commanding you, you may not consistently do things that please the commander. Your decisions strongly tend toward your affections so that you will to do what you have favor towards.
Linear Mode
