October 27, 2008

If Original Sin is True Then*:

1. God originated SIN

2. God will punish those who have been punished for Adam's sin, because they have been punished for Adam's sin.

3. Jesus could have married a virgin and produced a holy race by natural generation.

4. Man is more benevolent and just than GOD
(i.e. man's idea of justice is injustice, and that of injustice is just)

5. All human governments are inherently evil, for inability is never punished, and natural attributes are not considered evil.

6. The physical change that happened at the fall removed the sinner from the obligation to obey the moral law, for the moral law addresses only those able to obey it.

7. A physical change is necessary in regeneration.

8. If a physical change occurs, then a loss of identity occurs, however, Paul was always Paul.

9. God saving man from sin would be a matter of justice and not grace

10. God would be obligated, by justice, to relieve the unfortunate, rather than be gracious to the rebel.

11. Jesus did not become Man, with a sinful nature:
Therefore, he was not tempted in all points like as we are, nor touched with the feelings of our infirmities.

12. The will is not free.

13. How could Adam and Eve Sin?

14. How could angels sin?

15. Children go to hell.

16. All aborted babies go to hell.

17. Abortion would actually be a good thing as it actually decreases the amount of moral depravity occurring in the world. Few sinners born = a better world!

18. Sin is a calamity, not a crime

19. Repentance is impossible, because the conscience will never condemn the sinner of his inability.

20. Immediate repentance and submission cannot be urged immediately upon the sinner. Because He CAN"T.

21. Man is unable to repent.

22. Physical regeneration is necessary
This leads to universalism: FOR-
If Power changes one's nature in regeneration
If God is all powerful
If God is benevolent,
HE must therefore, in justice, regenerate all sinners

23. It regards the atonement of Christ as unnecessary. he did not have to die for the misfortune of men.

* I changed the Title for our Friend Anonymous Calvinist as I think he was a little confused as to the content of this peice.

13 comments:

Anonymous Calvinist said...

This is without a doubt the craziest thing I have ever read. It is clear from your list here that you don't have even a basic understanding of the Gospel. And to infer (in point #11) that Jesus had a sin nature is BLASPHEMY!!!

Do you even understand why the virgin birth was necessary? Obviously not. The Messiah HAD to be born of a virgin so that He would NOT inherit the sin of Adam. Jesus was tempted in every way as we are, yet remained without sin because He didn't inherit the sin nature that we all inherit from Adam. As the second Adam He lived a perfect life in our place and then on the cross His Father crushed Him in our place to pay for the sins that we have committed (see Isaiah 53:5 & 10).

And Jesus didn't die for the "misfortune of men." He died a substitutionary death for our sin.

Preston N said...

OOOOKAAAY! AC - Umm How can I put this. This piece is to show the absurdity of Original Sin. I am simply taking Original Sin to its logical conclusion based upon what the Bible really says about sin. I am not personally saying Jesus had a Sin Nature, but that if Sin Nature is True, then you logically must put forth that #11 must be true. I personally don't think Jesus had a sin nature for the bible says He was EXACTLY LIKE YOU AND ME IN EVERYWAY. Meaning, Jesus was like man in EVERY way, same nature, same flesh, same EVERYTHING - thus He and we don't have a sin nature, but rather we (mankind not Jesus) sin because we choose to sin and not due to our skin or our DNA.

If Jesus was not born exactly like every other person and had a different nature than the rest of us then we must negate or ignore verses like Hebrews 2:9-18, Phi 2:7-8, or Gal 4:4. If Jesus had a different body or nature than the rest of us, then he was not truly tempted like me and you are tempted. This is my point and reason for submitting this post - to show the absurdity and direct contradiction of Original Sin to what is truly stated in the Bible.

Besides, couldn't the Virgin Birth be just that - a miracle. Not some complex myth to explain away Sin Nature? Also, do you still believe in the Immaculate Conception of Mary?? What about infant baptism? For those too were necessary to explain some of the holes in the Original Sin Myth.


BTW- I am still waiting for the science community to find find that sin gene in the the Y Chromosome so we could eliminate sin? I think they just finished mapping the entire human genome so I am getting rather excited to hear the latest in Sin Gene Research! :)

Anonymous Calvinist said...

I stand by my earlier statement; this post says:

If original sin is true then... Jesus did not become a man with a sin nature...

Since you do not believe in original sin you are saying that Jesus had a sin nature.

Preston N said...

AC - OK let me be as plain about this as I can. Since I don't believe in original sin (that sin is a result of our physical constitution) then how or why would I propose that Jesus would have a "Sin Nature"? I believe Jesus was EXACTLY like man in EVERY WAY - meaning I don't believe man has a sin nature thus neither did Jesus.
#11 is proposing that IF Original SIN is indeed true then Jesus was not truly a human for if he would have had to had a sinful nature just like us because the scriptures says he was like us in every way.

Babies are born morally neutral. Man does not have a sinful nature, but rather sin is a moral choice. If sin is something we are born with or is a physical attribute then that's like saying we are being sent to hell for having brown hair or blue eyes. A good example of this is with the Colossians. The Gnostic's believed that the flesh was evil, therefore because the flesh was evil they had no control or responsibility for something they had no control over. Therefore they could do all sorts of wickedness and yet still believe to be saved. Sound familiar???

Patrick Durkee said...

"Babies are born morally neutral."

Jonathan Edwards raises a good point - if what you're saying is true, why then does infant mortality exist?

naphtali777 said...

patrick,

People die physically because the world is fallen (or if you're open to the idea, because we are not eating from the Tree of Life).

Animals are not moral beings (they do not sin), but they die too.

However, people die spiritually because they become morally accountable beings and sin against God.

An infant can die of SIDS due to our "physical depravity" (sickness, weakness, neediness), but a person cannot die spiritually until they willfully sin against God. This willful choice leads to a person's "spiritual depravity".

Betsy said...

Yep, not too hard to understand.

Preston N said...

Thanks Betsy. I am amazed at how logical all this seems when you really think about it.

seth said...

Preston,

Cool post, and this kind of dialogue is healthy in the Body of Christ. I enjoyed the discussion over on Tyler's blog, too. I'm closer to your view on the whole depravity issue, and I totally agree that it's strange to believe Jesus was somehow born with a different nature than we have. If so, what did his perfect life prove?

Don't let the TULIPs get you down.

Preston N said...

Seth

Thanks for the kind and encouraging words. It is often difficult to discuss this sort of stuff - especially as you said with so many TULIP's out there. It is sad to see how far this theology has corrupted much of our thinking. My point I was trying to make on Tyler's blog is that Original Sin does little if anything to persuade a homosexual to leave his or her sin because they already try to justify their sin by saying they were born that way and Calvinist are doing nothing more than to further their excuse. Its so sad to see this sort of thing happening. God Bless You and your kind words, they do mean so much.

Allison said...

let me preface this by saying that I'm not a calvinist, however I do believe in original sin.
now hold up for a minute, let me explain.
I believe in original sin not because my mpastor preaches it, or calvin preach it or Billy bob down the street is preaching about it. I believe it because of evidence for it in the Bible.
if you would please (realize it's long), read this paper that I wrote recently, it explains my belief on this topic.

Original Sin
Original Sin is commonly described as humanity’s state of sin, resulting from the fall of man. Around the globe there many different religions that deny this concept. Islam teaches that there is no original sin. The Mormon Church also denies it by saying that Adam did not fall from his state of innocence downward but actually fell upward. That by listening to the devils lies it actually gave him the opportunity to become a God. So in essence the Devil told the truth. Others like the Catholic Church believe that there is original sin, but it is washed away by baptism. Everyone seems to deal with this in a different way, but everyone in one way or another recognizes that man is not living up to his full potential.
Saint Augustine while he didn’t originate or invent the doctrine of original sin he did greatly develop it as well as popularize it. Augustine stated that Adam’s sin is transmitted by concupiscence, resulting in mankind becoming a “Massa Damnata”; a condemned crowd or a mass of perdition; with a greatly enfeebled, though not destroyed freedom of will. This means that Adam’s sin nature is passed down from generation to generation therefore making every member of the human race condemned, stained by sin. Augustine’s statement also points out how because we do have a sin nature and are inclined to sin, we do not have complete freedom of will, we do not have the ability to do any true good on our own account.
Scriptural foundation for this doctrine is found in the New Testament teachings of the apostle Paul as well as the book of Psalms and Job. In Romans 5:12 it states “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.” Romans 5:21 says “so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” I Corinthians 15:22 states “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.” The Psalmist says in Psalm 58:3: "the wicked go astray from the womb, they err from their birth speaking lies. In Psalm 51:5 David claimed that he was conceived in iniquity." Job asks the question "What is man, that he could be pure? And he who is born of a woman, that he could be righteous?" (Job 15:14) Job 25:4: "How then can man be righteous before God? Or how can he be pure who is born of a woman?”
I personally agree with Augustine’s view of original sin, in fact I think that it is a crucial doctrine that has to be settled in our hearts as it can affect other areas of our walk. Logically, what does it mean if there is no sin nature? It has to mean that we are born sinless because there are only two categories. Biblically, God told Adam that he would die the day he disobeyed. Adam’s death from sin was first spiritual, then physical. This is the same sequence as all of humanity; we have a built-in death warrant, our sin nature. Because of the sin we inherited from Adam we are all spiritually dead, stained by sin and unable to do good or get to heaven on our own.

Preston N said...

Allison - I find your comment somewhat contradictory. You start your post by saying:

"I believe in original sin not because my pastor preaches it, or calvin preach it or Billy bob down the street is preaching about it. I believe it because of evidence for it in the Bible. if you would please (realize it's long), read this paper that I wrote recently, it explains my belief on this topic."

Then you proceed to give me a dissertation about the beliefs of Augustine. Last time I checked Augustine is neither the canon of scripture or a god-inspired author of the OT or NT.

Secondly - you might want to dig a little deeper about Augustine. This man has corrupted more doctrine in the church than almost Satan himself. Much of Augustine's doctrine was a hybrid of pagan dualism and Christianity. Augustine is also the author of the worship of Mother Mary and the Immaculate Conception of Mary. Therefore, I tend not to place too much credibility on Augustine - BTW - just so you know John Calvin based most of his doctrine on none other than Augustine.

Allison said...

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to post the whole paper I wrote, ( I had to write it on Augustine and his view for school) however I still uphold what I said about the scriptural foundations for original sin. While I don't agree with a lot of what Augustine teaches, I do think that he has some valid points on some things, for no other reason than that he usually gives you something to think about.