Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,629
Members1,323
|
Most Online5,850 Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: Rick H]
#136546
10/08/11 05:08 AM
10/08/11 05:08 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
In the theology of the Catholic Church, original sin is regarded as the general condition of sinfulness into which humans are born, distinct from the actual sins that a person commits. ... This "state of deprivation of the original holiness and justice … transmitted to the descendants of Adam along with human nature" involves no personal responsibility or personal guilt on their part. Personal responsibility and guilt were Adam's, who because of his sin, was unable to pass on to his descendants a human nature with the holiness with which it would otherwise have been endowed, in this way implicating them in his sin. The doctrine of original sin thus does not impute the sin of the father to his children, but merely states that they inherit from him a "human nature deprived of original holiness and justice", which is "transmitted by propagation to all mankind". ... 'Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam (as the Pelagians do vainly talk), but it is the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually' I don't have a problem with what I quoted above. Adam was created pure and holy. By transgression, he lost that purity and holiness. He could only be pure and holy as long as he was abiding in Jesus. Since Adam had no inherent holiness, he obviously could not pass on holiness to his children. Neither could he pass on his saving relationship with Jesus. Hence, all are born without holiness and without Jesus. By one man's disobedience, the many were made sinners. That is Original Sin. There is no problem with it. The Catholic error of baptizing babies is not due to the belief that babies are not inherently saved, which is correct. The error is in believing that baptism infuses the holiness that was lost by Adam's sin. Adam's sin did verily deprave us. However, the solution is not infusion of holiness through sprinkling of water. The only solution is to receive holiness from the Living Water.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: asygo]
#136549
10/08/11 03:36 PM
10/08/11 03:36 PM
|
SDA Charter Member Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
True, because of A&E's sin, we are born with a sinful nature, and because of this we begin cultivating sinful traits of character from the moment of consciousness. Not until we experience rebirth are we capable of cultivating sinless traits of character. However, no one is guilty of sinning because A&E sinned, that is, God doesn't count us guilty of eating the forbidden fruit. No one, other than A&E, is guilty of the original sin (i.e. eating the forbidden fruit). The only consequence of their first, original sin, so far as the rest of us are concerned, is that we are born with a sinful nature. We incur our own original guilt the moment we commit our own original sin.
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: Mountain Man]
#136586
10/09/11 04:52 PM
10/09/11 04:52 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
What I got from Augustine's writings is that because of Adam's sin, the rest of us are born without righteousness.
Does anyone here think that we are born righteous? If so, then you agree with Augustine on this point.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: asygo]
#136588
10/09/11 04:59 PM
10/09/11 04:59 PM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
What I have found in my experience is that most people who disagree with Augustine's doctrine of Original Sin have never read Augustine for themselves. They trust other people to do the studying for them, and simply parrot their favorite spiritual father.
Furthermore, their entire belief system seems to be founded on whether or not they have guilt, as opposed to seeking what pleases God. IOW, instead of "What wilt thou have me to do," they say, "It's not my fault."
So, instead of seeking, by God's grace, to eradicate the evil heredity we all receive from Adam, they merely excuse it by saying they can't do anything about it. I guess what I'm saying is the opposite of the thread title: there are dangers in not believing Original Sin.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: asygo]
#136861
10/15/11 11:02 PM
10/15/11 11:02 PM
|
OP
Group: Admin Team
3000+ Member
|
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,126
Florida, USA
|
|
What I have found in my experience is that most people who disagree with Augustine's doctrine of Original Sin have never read Augustine for themselves. They trust other people to do the studying for them, and simply parrot their favorite spiritual father.
Furthermore, their entire belief system seems to be founded on whether or not they have guilt, as opposed to seeking what pleases God. IOW, instead of "What wilt thou have me to do," they say, "It's not my fault."
So, instead of seeking, by God's grace, to eradicate the evil heredity we all receive from Adam, they merely excuse it by saying they can't do anything about it. I guess what I'm saying is the opposite of the thread title: there are dangers in not believing Original Sin. I guess i will have to study further as what the Catholic church now teaches also seems to have varied from the 'original' thoughts he gave...
Last edited by Rick H; 10/15/11 11:02 PM.
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: Rick H]
#136863
10/16/11 12:48 AM
10/16/11 12:48 AM
|
Global Moderator Supporting Member 2022
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,440
Canada
|
|
The main reason many Adventist deny the doctrine of original sin has to do with their belief of Christ's human nature. Also the prevailing concepts of "original sin" has a much to do with Calvinism as with Augustine. Calvinists define original sin thus: "Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto." By original sin we mean the evil quality which characterizes man's natural disposition and will. We call this sin of nature original, because each fallen man is born with it, and because it is the source or origin in each man of his actual transgressions. By calling it total, we do not mean that men are from their youth as bad as they can be. Evil men and seducers wax worse and worse, "deceiving and being deceived" (2 Tim. 3:13). Nor do we mean that they have no social virtues toward their fellowmen in which they are sincere. We do not assert with extremists that because they are natural men therefore all their friendship, honesty, truth, sympathy, patriotism, domestic love, are pretenses or hypocrisies. What our Confession says is, "That they have wholly lost ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation."
...Calvin also found the same doctrines handed down by the best, most learned, most godly, uninspired church fathers, as Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas,
...."The carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be," (inability of will). Ephesians 2:3 All men are "by nature the children of wrath" and "dead in trespasses and sins" (v. 1).
...What is the nature and agency of the moral revolution usually called effectual calling or regeneration? This change must be more than an outer reformation of conduct; it is an inward revolution of first principles which regulate conduct. It must go deeper than a change of purpose as to sin and godliness; it must be a reversal of the original dispositions which hitherto prompted the soul to choose sin and reject godliness.
....Conversion begins in, and proceeds constantly out of, regeneration, as does the continuous growth of a plant out of the first sprouting or quickening of its dry seed. In conversion the renewed soul is an active agent: "[God's] people shall be willing in the day of [his] power" (Ps. 110:3). The converted man chooses and acts the new life of faith and obedience heartily and freely, as prompted by the Holy Ghost. In this sense, he works out his own salvation (Phil. 2:12). But manifestly in regeneration, in the initial revolution of disposition, the soul does not act, but is a thing acted on. In this first point there can be no cooperation of the man's will with the divine power. The agency is wholly Gods, and not man's, even in part. The vital change must be affected by immediate direct divine power. {Five Points of Calvinism, by Dabney}
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: dedication]
#136870
10/16/11 02:29 AM
10/16/11 02:29 AM
|
Active Member 2012
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,826
E. Oregon, USA
|
|
The main reason many Adventist deny the doctrine of original sin has to do with their belief of Christ's human nature. Would you elaborate, please?
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: Colin]
#136871
10/16/11 02:39 AM
10/16/11 02:39 AM
|
Active Member 2012
Very Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,826
E. Oregon, USA
|
|
Generally, Catholicism is three quarters correct, isn't it: sinful human nature is inclined to sin, morally weakened and unable to resist that inclination so captive to it and depraved, and condemned by God's law for its sinfulness. Guilt is excluded altogether till individually we sin.
That's the truth, right?
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: Rick H]
#136888
10/17/11 04:58 AM
10/17/11 04:58 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2023
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,583
California, USA
|
|
I guess i will have to study further as what the Catholic church now teaches also seems to have varied from the 'original' thoughts he gave... I don't know what the RCC teaches now, but it would be good to read what Augustine actually said before drawing conclusions.
By God's grace, Arnold
There is no excuse for any one in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation. RH 12/20/1892
|
|
|
Re: Original Sin, are there any dangers in this belief?
[Re: asygo]
#136915
10/18/11 03:13 AM
10/18/11 03:13 AM
|
SDA Active Member 2020
5500+ Member
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,368
Western, USA
|
|
Error lies close to truth.
By nature we are alienated from God. The Holy Spirit describes our condition in such words as these: "Dead in trespasses and sins;" "the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint;" "no soundness in it." We are held fast in the snare of Satan, "taken captive by him at his will." Ephesians 2:1; Isaiah 1:5, 6; 2 Timothy 2:26. God desires to heal us, to set us free. But since this requires an entire transformation, a renewing of our whole nature, we must yield ourselves wholly to Him. {SC 43.2}
What Adam and Eve did, alienated the whole human race. We are not guilty of their sin in any legal sense. But we are none the less, affected by their choice.
On the transmission of a sinful nature from father to son the following should be kept in mind: “It is inevitable that children should suffer from the consequences of parental wrong-doing, but they are not punished for the parents’ guilt, except as they participate in their sins. It is usually the case, however, that children walk in the steps of their parents. By inheritance and example the sons become partakers of the father’s sin. Wrong tendencies, perverted appetites, and debased morals, as well as physical disease and degeneracy, are transmitted as a legacy from father to son, to the third and fourth generation” {PP 306.3}
What causes sickness and death? SIN. We all have sin in our nature.
By taking upon Himself man's nature in its fallen condition, Christ did not in the least participate in its sin. He was subject to the infirmities and weaknesses of the flesh with which humanity is encompassed, "that it might be fulfilled that was spoken by the prophet Esaias, Himself took our infirmities and bare our sicknesses." He was touched with the feeling of our infirmities, and was in all points tempted like as we are. And yet He was without a spot. {16MR 116.3}
There is a real, physical component to sin. It is inheritable. Romans 5:12 proves this. Ellen White confirms it.
Oh, that men might open their minds to know God as he is revealed in his Son! {ST, January 20, 1890}
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|