[MoonlitWaves]

This has never sat right with me and it was drilled into my head when i was in catholic school. Why would God punish us all from what the first two people on earth did. Why does everyone come in to life with a sin. Just doesn't seem logical. To me that story of original sin is a scare tactic to get people to baptist a child and make them part of this religion. So whats the deal why are we all punished at birth from what the first two people on earth did.

What I had wondered at one time that is sort of along the lines of what you are asking is why weren't we all given the opportunity that they were? If we all had that opportunity then surely not everyone would have chosen sin.

But then I thought about this, and my thoughts may help you as well... If everyone of us had the same opportunity they did then we could not have been born by man. God would have to create us all as He did Adam and Eve. Not only that, He would have had to separate us from those who chose to sin. The reason being is because we could not know sin at all like Adam and Eve did at first. If we are born to sinners then we see and know sin. Therefore we would have to be completely away from sinners, not knowing sin, then we could be provided the opportunity to listen to God or not. When I thought about it, I realized how ridiculous that would be. And also, it is not necessary for Him to do that since He sent Jesus to die so that we may have eternal life again. I also thought that God could have simply done away with His creation altogether if He wanted to. So rather than wondering why I didn't get the opportunity Adam and Eve did, I am grateful that God provided a way that we can go back to the perfection He intended from the beginning, because He could have very well done away with His creation on the spot when Adam and Eve sinned. There is nothing better, that greater shows His love for us, than keeping us around after what we did and still do, and providing a way that we can have eternal life again.

You are punished at birth because you are a sinner at birth. Have you ever known anyone, besides Jesus, who was sinless? More so than that, have you ever known a child who was sinless? I'm not talking about accountablility here. I am just talking about sin.

[inthebox]

From Mark 10

13People were bringing little children to Jesus to have him touch them, but the disciples rebuked them. 14When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, "Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. 15I tell you the truth, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it." 16And he took the children in his arms, put his hands on them and blessed them.

Is he referring to their innocent, "pre fallen like" state? :confused:
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Like all prior posts mention we are sinners and have that weakness regardless of what Adam and Eve did.

You don't even have to believe in the Bible or religion to know that this world is not perfect and never will be. Look at all the suffering and misery.

God is Holy, perfect, good. He cannot be with those that are not - just His nature.
Some may see this just judgement as punishment, but consider...

As Moonlight mentions...



He sends the solution - His love, His Son, Jesus Christ. :D


A truly evil God would let us get what we deserve. :(

[Fr_Chuck]

Well of course we can each exchange verses that the other will not accept as proof. The bible is one faith, you can not merely dismiss verses you don't agree are clear on Gods ability to hold all mankind as unclean,

This verse obviously is talking about the faith of the child to believe, not any innocent state. It is just a matter that man is sinful, if you don't believe at birth, well shortly as soon as they are aware, since sinful nature of man There is nothing man can do, to clean that sin without Christ,

This differnece is why a portion of the protestant churches do not do infant baptism, and the remainder of the protestant, catholic and orthodox do infant baptism. You will never convince me, and sadly I will not convince you, if that was possible then entire denominations would change.

[inthebox]

Fr-

I was not trying to be contrary.

I do appreciate that other Christians have differing views on certain topics or versus and I try to learn from all of this, because not to infrequently I'm not quite sure what the meaning is. Thanks.



Grace and Peace

[N0help4u]

I agree with Inthebox.
My point is that if we are born in a doomed state of sin punishment then 'innocense of a child' and faith of a child would be a contradictry thing.

You can say The bible is one faith, you can not merely dismiss verses you don't agree are clear on Gods ability to hold all mankind as unclean,
if it is that simple there wouldn't be so many different doctrinal beliefs.

[Tj3]

I agree with Inthebox.
My point is that if we are born in a doomed state of sin punishment then 'innocense of a child' and faith of a child would be a contradictry thing.

You can say The bible is one faith, you can not merley dismiss verses you don't agree are clear on Gods ability to hold all mankind as unclean,
if it is that simple there wouldn't be so many different doctrinal beliefs.

I have to agree with Chuck on this one. We are to come to God as a young child comes to their Father, believing what he says without questioning whether it is true, and without questioning His authority. There is nothing in the passage that says that children are innocent, nor are we told that we have to be innocent - we cannot be. But taking this passage to means the faith of the child is in concert with what scripture says about faith of the OT saints in Hebrews, and I am reminded specifically of the faith of Abraham:

James 2:23
23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
NKJV

Too many people come to God saying that they do not believe the Bible because they cannot understand so much - but God asks us to come to Him as a child. You do not have to understand everything, just as you can ride in an aircraft and believe that it can do what the airline claims without understanding everything about how it happens.

The second topic which is not explicitly mentioned, but which is inherently part of your comment is whether children are saved - and that is a different topic all on it's own.

[ordinaryguy]

I don't have a big problem with sin, original or otherwise. I understand it as a sense of profound alienation and separation from the source of our truest and highest Self. Living on the material plane makes it hard to avoid such an illusion.

What sticks in my throat is the idea that a loving Father would require the death of an innocent being as a condition of being reconciled to his children. As I see it, the doctrine of sacrificial atonement by the death of an innocent is fundamentally at odds with the doctrine of a loving, forgiving, and merciful Father.

[Tj3]

I don't have a big problem with sin, original or otherwise. I understand it as a sense of profound alienation and separation from the source of our truest and highest Self. Living on the material plane makes it hard to avoid such an illusion.

What sticks in my throat is the idea that a loving Father would require the death of an innocent being as a condition of being reconciled to his children. As I see it, the doctrine of sacrificial atonement by the death of an innocent is fundamentally at odds with the doctrine of a loving, forgiving, and merciful Father.

First, keep in mind that God did not require the death of another innocent being. He, and Almighty being, the creator of the universe Himself, He came to earth to take the penalty upon Himself (yes, God Himself was that innocent being who took the penalty) that was required as a result of our disobedience. And He did so while man was in sin and in rebellion against Him. He made the first move, and did so to provide a way that may could be reconciled, when man was ready to do so.

Keep in mind that God is a Holy God and cannot abide sin in His presence. So what does He do about our sin? When we receive Him as Saviour, He covers our sin by imputing His own righteous into us.

Can you imagine a situation where you had committed a serious crime, a murder or robbery, and the person responsible for putting the law and penalty in place, be it President, Prime Minister or Queen came themselves and said - "release him, and I will take the penalty myself in his place"?

There is so much more that I could add, but I cannot imagine a human with so much love - how could anyone say that this is not the act of a loving God?

[ordinaryguy]

I'm sorry, Tj, no amount of contortion can make this palatable. Believe me, I tried for years. Where could a required death penalty come from, that God would be powerless to commute it and to forgive whomever He will?

[Tj3]

I'm sorry, Tj, no amount of contortion can make this palatable. Believe me, I tried for years. Where could a required death penalty come from, that God would be powerless to commute it and to forgive whomever He will?

I note that you did not even address the points that I raised. Rather than address the points, you just reject them outright for no stated reason as "contortion". Interesting.

Can God forgive sin? Absolutely. But God also said upfront what the price was and to be just, the price must be paid. Then He said that He was prepared to pay that price Himself and would forgive whosoever would receive it. And you accuse Him of not being forgiving? What else is forgiveness than accepting and absorbing the price for a wrong committed against you and then choosing to forget that sin. So He did pay the price for sin, but if I read you right, you don't agree with HOW He chose to forgive the sin. Since He took the full penalty, what does it matter to you?

[N0help4u]

TJ3 So according to what you are saying that we are born punished in original sin as though we did the sin ourself?
I believe that we are born with the sin of human nature within us but other than that this is how I see 'original sin'

By his sin Adam, as the first man, lost the original holiness and justice he had received from God, not only for himself but for all human beings.

Adam and Eve transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called "original sin".

As a result of original sin, human nature is weakened in its powers, subject to ignorance, suffering and the domination of death, and inclined to sin (this inclination is called "concupiscence").

[Tj3]

TJ3 So according to what you are saying that we are born punished in original sin as though we did the sin ourself?

No absolutely not. I cannot imagine for a moment how you could think that I was saying that after what I have posted in previous messages on here.

We are born with the DESIRE to sin because of the sinful orientation that came due to the corruption of all nature resulting from the Original sin. But we are held responsible for the sins that we commit and only the sins that we commit.

The doctrine of the original sin in scripture DOES NOT say that we are held to account for Adam's sin, but rather that the Original sin corrupted all nature giving us a sin nature (sinful orientation)

I hope that my position on this is now clear!

[N0help4u]

okay that is a word we agree on but that isn't what I take the Catholics definition of original sin to mean. And that was my point. May not have worded it very well.

[Tj3]

okay that is a word we agree on but that isn't what I take the Catholics definition of original sin to mean. And that was my point. May not have worded it very well.

Okay. I agree. I believe that the difference between what I read in scripture and the Catholic position is that they do not believe that it is possible to separate out the sin nature from sin. I believe that I am correct in saying that they believe that the sin nature is sin inherited from Adam, in which case your description of what they believe would be correct.

[Fr_Chuck]

I will still argue that it is not merely a "Catholic" position, while they do also teach it, it is a Chrsitian position, since Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran,
Episcopal and several other churches teaching also.

Why must one call it a "catholic" teaching of original sin, not merely the Christian teaching of original sin. Or the Lutheran teaching of original sin.

[Tj3]

I will still argue that it is not merely a "Catholic" position, while they do also teach it, it is a Chrsitian position, since Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran,
Episcopal and several other churches teaching also.

Why must one call it a "catholic" teaching of orginal sin, not merley the Christian teaching of orginal sin. or the Lutheran teaching of orginal sin.

I, for one, do not agree that it is the Christian position. There may indeed be some denominations who choose to hold to this position - that is not in dispute, but I do not see it in scripture and have shown verses that explicitly teach against it. That is why I would disagree that it is the Christian position - that and the fact that it is far from being universally accepted by professing Christians. One could certainly call it a position held by certain, or even a number of professing Christian denominations, but that is as far as I believe that we could go on labeling it.

If you ask Christians if they believe in the Doctrine of the Original Sin, I believe that all professing Christians will agree - but as we see here when we get into what we mean by that term, we see that we are far from being in agreement.

[ordinaryguy]

I note that you did not even address the points that I raised. Rather than address the points, you just reject them outright for no stated reason as "contortion". Interesting.

Well you didn't answer my question either, so I guess we're even.

And you accuse Him of not being forgiving?

Not at all. I'm quite sure He forgives whomever He deems worthy, and does it fully, freely and willingly, without any necessity for a gruesome death by anybody.

So He did pay the price for sin, but if I read you right, you don't agree with HOW He chose to forgive the sin. Since He took the full penalty, what does it matter to you?

No, I agree completely with how He does it. What I disagree with is the Christian explanation of how He does it. I don't think the "criminal justice" analogy fits the actual situation. Estrangement and separation are consequences of sin, not punishments or penalties for it. Forgiveness is reunion and reconciliation, not some kind of judicial determination. The reason it matters to me is that I think the "atonement" doctrine misrepresents His character and attitude toward human beings.

[Fr_Chuck]

Well if the majority of all Christians accept it as their teachings, it would make it Christian, I doubt if you talk to the local Lutheran seminary they would view it as a non christian belief.

It is merely not your denominations teachings, but as for as pure numbers, it is accepted by the largest number of chirsitains as their teachings

[Tj3]

Well if the majority of all Christians accept it as thier teachings, it would make it Christian, I doubt if you talk to the local Lutheran seminary they would view it as a non christian beleif.

It is merely not your denominations teachings, but as for as pure numbers, it is accepted by the largest number of chirsitains as thier teachings

I do not have a denomination, nor do I believe that numbers or indeed even denominational teachings establish orthodox Christian beliefs, but rather that is why God gave us the Holy Scriptures (Assuming that anyone could validate that the majority of Christians actually personally hold to this belief).

If a denominational belief does not align with the Bible, which do you believe should be considered the standard?

Rom 11:4-5
4 But what does the divine response say to him? "I have reserved for Myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal."
NKJV

When it is millions against the 7000, will it be numbers, or God's word who will decide which side we are on? That day will come:

Luke 18:8
8 I tell you that He will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He really find faith on the earth?"
NKJV

[Tj3]

Well you didn't answer my question either, so I guess we're even.

Actually, I did. Maybe you did not read far enough down.

Not at all. I'm quite sure He forgives whomever He deems worthy, and does it fully, freely and willingly, without any necessity for a gruesome death by anybody.

Let's see what He says:

Heb 9:22
22 And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission.
NKJV

Do you believe that you are in a position to judge whether God is right?

No, I agree completely with how He does it. What I disagree with is the Christian explanation of how He does it.

Why don't we go to God's word and go by what He says?