Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

  • Guest, Join Papa Zoom today for some uplifting biblical encouragement! --> Daily Verses
  • The Gospel of Jesus Christ

    Heard of "The Gospel"? Want to know more?

    There is salvation in no other, for there is not another name under heaven having been given among men, by which it behooves us to be saved."

Are You A Child of God?

2024 Website Hosting Fees

Total amount
$1,048.00
Goal
$1,038.00
PART 2 OF 2

Sorry, W...this is too much for me to handle all at once...just for time's sake.

Let's take it one idea at a time....

WHAT about Augustine did I misrepresent??
WHO came up with the idea of Original Sin if not him?

Here is an article from Wiki that I agree with.

Augustine of Hippowrote that original sin is transmitted by concupiscence and enfeebles freedom of the will without destroying it.[2]
Augustine of Hippo (354–430) taught that Adam's sin[35] is transmitted by concupiscence, or "hurtful desire",[36][37] resulting in humanity becoming a massa damnata (mass of perdition, condemned crowd), with much enfeebled, though not destroyed, freedom of will.[2] When Adam sinned, human nature was thenceforth transformed. Adam and Eve, via sexual reproduction, recreated human nature. Their descendants now live in sin, in the form of concupiscence, a term Augustine used in a metaphysical, not a psychological sense.[38] Augustine insisted that concupiscence was not a being but a bad quality, the privation of good or a wound.[39] He admitted that sexual concupiscence (libido) might have been present in the perfect human nature in paradise, and that only later it became disobedient to human will as a result of the first couple's disobedience to God's will in the original sin.[40] In Augustine's view (termed "Realism"), all of humanity was really present in Adam when he sinned, and therefore all have sinned. Original sin, according to Augustine, consists of the guilt of Adam which all humans inherit. Justo Gonzalez interprets Augustine's teaching that humans are utterly depraved in nature and grace is irresistible, results in conversion, and leads to perseverance.[41] Although earlier Christian authors taught the elements of physical death, moral weakness, and a sin propensity within original sin, Augustine was the first to add the concept of inherited guilt (reatus) from Adam whereby an infant was eternally damned at birth. Augustine held the traditional view that free will was weakened but not destroyed by original sin until he converted in 412 CE to the Stoic view that humanity had no free will except to sin as a result of his anti-Pelagian view of infant baptism.[42] [He converted about numerous ideas]

Augustine articulated his explanation in reaction to Pelagianism, which insisted that humans have of themselves, without the necessary help of God's grace, the ability to lead a morally good life, and thus denied both the importance of baptism and the teaching that God is the giver of all that is good. Pelagius claimed that the influence of Adam on other humans was merely that of bad example.
Augustine held that the effects of Adam's sin are transmitted to his descendants not by example but by the very fact of generation from that ancestor. A wounded nature comes to the soul and body of the new person from his/her parents, who experience libido (or concupiscence). Augustine's view was that human procreation was the way the transmission was being effected. He did not blame, however, the sexual passion itself, but the spiritual concupiscence present in human nature, soul and body, even after baptismal regeneration.[43] Christian parents transmit their wounded nature to children, because they give them birth, not the "re-birth".[44] Augustine used Ciceronian Stoic concept of passions, to interpret St. Paul's doctrine of universal sin and redemption. In that view, also sexual desire itself as well as other bodily passions were consequence of the original sin, in which pure affections were wounded by vice and became disobedient to human reason and will. As long as they carry a threat to the dominion of reason over the soul they constitute moral evil, but since they do not presuppose consent, one cannot call them sins. Humanity will be liberated from passions, and pure affections will be restored only when all sin has been washed away and ended, that is in the resurrection of the dead.[45][46]

Augustine believed that unbaptized infants go to hell as a consequence of original sin.[47][48] The Latin Church Fathers who followed Augustine adopted his position, which became a point of reference for Latin theologians in the Middle Ages.[49] In the later medieval period, some theologians continued to hold Augustine's view, others held that unbaptized infants suffered no pain at all: unaware of being deprived of the beatific vision, they enjoyed a state of natural, not supernatural happiness.

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin#History_of_the_doctrine
 
It is written,I did not write the verse. All souls are Mine.
You agree that God created all things, Father of us all ,then turn around and say that sounds too Universalist.

You asked if we were the children of God, so yes, in that sense.

Do they all end up with Him?
Yes, in a sense.
Rom.14:11 and other places
Every knee shall bow to Me, and every tongue shall confess to God.
But
That doesn't mean they have everlasting life.
But doesn't ending up with God mean going to heaven?

I agree that EVERYTHING in the universe belongs to God...in that sense I've already agreed.

But we don't all end up with Him..
That would be those with eternal life...
But some go to eternal judgement.

John 5:28-29
28“Do not marvel at this; for an hour is coming, in which all who are in the tombs will hear His voice,
29and will come forth; those who did the good deeds to a resurrection of life, those who committed the evil deeds to a resurrection of judgment.
 
i know i am a child of God for so many reasons -

  • God said He wanted me via the gospel and i took Him at His word
  • Jesus redeemed me and i gladly accepted that and started walking with Jesus
  • the Holy Spirit bears witness to me that i belong to God
  • God reached out to me and i accepted and received everything He offered and
  • i believe He is right about everything - i change my mind to agree with Him
  • i ask Him to tell me what to think and help me do what He wants me to do
  • i obey His commands by His power - the Holy Spirit in me accomplishes this
  • i love His work in my life - His miracles - His strength purity joy peace patience
  • i love His words in the bible - they change my pov and lifestyle
  • He has done so much for me and others - He is amazing
  • if i get busy and don't have enough quiet time talking to God i get feeling unwell
  • God is my source and my life
  • apart from Him i am not happy motivated inspired effective
  • my life goes better when i walk closely with God
  • i love being around others who delight most in God
  • i feel out of place with people who delight in things other than God
  • i want to please God - i want to find out what He approves of - and what Jesus did
  • i am so happy God wanted me and loved me despite my shortcomings
  • i have done stupid foolish things and God got me out of all of them
  • God speaks to me when i get off track and gets me straightened out
  • i love people - something God did because i used to love only animals
  • God caused me to love people by His power because i couldn't do it on my own
so basically all the GOOD changes in my life/heart/soul/lifestyle/attitude that i could NOT do before i met Jesus convince me that i am a christian

as a brand new christian i was confused about so many things and quite a mess - but God loved me anyway and kept working with me - and the more unconditional love and undeserved mercy God showed me the deeper i loved Him - now i can't go a day without talking to God and listening for His heart / voice / inspiration -

the longer i walk with God the more i need Him - as the bond gets stronger the less i can function without God - it is a daily walk that needs good company with God lovers and good doses of spiritual food (prayer/the bible) - God is the Author and Perfecter of all of this - i still can't accomplish anything Godly on my own - i still need God's power to do it all -

i share all this to say that if we keep walking with God through the good and the bad this is how good it gets - hang on - don't let feelings sway - pledge allegiance to God and watch Him work - when sin happens run to God and not away - face sins with God's help so they can be conquered - don't believe any of the lies that God's love is conditional on our performance - believe God when He says salvation is a gift to WHOSOEVER wants it/wills/wishes it - no matter how bad we fail/stumble/waffle/fall God still has a way out - a way back - the blood of Jesus overcomes sin and washes us clean - sin hurts us - God loves us - get God's help to stop sinning so the pain/foolishness/chaos will stop - God works with us as long as it takes to get free from sin - face sin head on and make it the enemy and God our friend
:clap:nod:thumbsup

What a great post!
I think we could close this thread down now!!!

Thanks from all of us.
 
i know i am a child of God for so many reasons -

  • God said He wanted me via the gospel and i took Him at His word
  • Jesus redeemed me and i gladly accepted that and started walking with Jesus
  • the Holy Spirit bears witness to me that i belong to God
  • God reached out to me and i accepted and received everything He offered and
  • i believe He is right about everything - i change my mind to agree with Him
  • i ask Him to tell me what to think and help me do what He wants me to do
  • i obey His commands by His power - the Holy Spirit in me accomplishes this
  • i love His work in my life - His miracles - His strength purity joy peace patience
  • i love His words in the bible - they change my pov and lifestyle
  • He has done so much for me and others - He is amazing
  • if i get busy and don't have enough quiet time talking to God i get feeling unwell
  • God is my source and my life
  • apart from Him i am not happy motivated inspired effective
  • my life goes better when i walk closely with God
  • i love being around others who delight most in God
  • i feel out of place with people who delight in things other than God
  • i want to please God - i want to find out what He approves of - and what Jesus did
  • i am so happy God wanted me and loved me despite my shortcomings
  • i have done stupid foolish things and God got me out of all of them
  • God speaks to me when i get off track and gets me straightened out
  • i love people - something God did because i used to love only animals
  • God caused me to love people by His power because i couldn't do it on my own
so basically all the GOOD changes in my life/heart/soul/lifestyle/attitude that i could NOT do before i met Jesus convince me that i am a christian

as a brand new christian i was confused about so many things and quite a mess - but God loved me anyway and kept working with me - and the more unconditional love and undeserved mercy God showed me the deeper i loved Him - now i can't go a day without talking to God and listening for His heart / voice / inspiration -

the longer i walk with God the more i need Him - as the bond gets stronger the less i can function without God - it is a daily walk that needs good company with God lovers and good doses of spiritual food (prayer/the bible) - God is the Author and Perfecter of all of this - i still can't accomplish anything Godly on my own - i still need God's power to do it all -

i share all this to say that if we keep walking with God through the good and the bad this is how good it gets - hang on - don't let feelings sway - pledge allegiance to God and watch Him work - when sin happens run to God and not away - face sins with God's help so they can be conquered - don't believe any of the lies that God's love is conditional on our performance - believe God when He says salvation is a gift to WHOSOEVER wants it/wills/wishes it - no matter how bad we fail/stumble/waffle/fall God still has a way out - a way back - the blood of Jesus overcomes sin and washes us clean - sin hurts us - God loves us - get God's help to stop sinning so the pain/foolishness/chaos will stop - God works with us as long as it takes to get free from sin - face sin head on and make it the enemy and God our friend

:clap:salute
 
Apologies for the delayed reply...obligations have kept me away for several days.

I don't see anything here. Did you delete?
No problem.
I checked.
Part 1 was just YOUR post so you could know what I was responding to.

Part 2 is MY reply to you.

A post can't be more than 10,000 words long.
I could speak 10,000 words just to say good night....

We were discussing Augustine. You put a lot out there and I can't handle "carpet bombing". So I posted on him because I think I know him pretty well.
 
PART 2 OF 2

Sorry, W...this is too much for me to handle all at once...just for time's sake.

Let's take it one idea at a time....

WHAT about Augustine did I misrepresent??
WHO came up with the idea of Original Sin if not him?

Here is an article from Wiki that I agree with....


source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin#History_of_the_doctrine


I'm not a big fan of control-v apologetics, especially from Wikipedia where sources are sketchy to say the least, as I'll demonstrate at the end of my post here.


You misrepresented St. Augustine twice in this thread when you:

1. Denied that he taught being baptized = being born again

2. Claimed he invented the doctrine of original sin


Your first misrepresentation was addressed here ---> https://christianforums.net/Fellowship/index.php?threads/are-you-a-child-of-god.78784/#post-1503853

...where I quote the Doctor of Grace explicitly stating that we are born again via baptism. I have many, many more of his works I can reference if you want additional quotations. Baptismal regeneration was not denied / rejected until certain Protestant sects (the anabaptists) came on the scene in the 16th century.


I also address your second misrepresentation in my same post, again linked above. I provided quotations from each century preceding St. Augustine’s own time, beginning with the Apostle Paul to demonstrate that St. Augustine did not invent the doctrine of original sin. While he may have written much and helped develop the Church’s theology on it, he clearly did not invent it.

It would be helpful to know the biggest opponents of the doctrine of original sin were the Pelagians. The Church had been battling the Pelagians before St. Augustine got involved in refuting their errors. For he tells us in On Merit and the Forgiveness of Sins and the Baptism of Infants (written in 412) that he was arguing not his own opinions, but rather what the Church already believed and taught as an article of faith. (cf. Book I, Chapters 56, 62, 64; Book III, Chapter 10. There are about ten other references in this work attesting to this being the faith of the Church.)

We also know his contemporary, St. Jerome, famously taught on original sin against the Pelagians as well. Furthermore, the bishop of Rome at the time, Pope Innocent I, officially condemned Pelagianism and excommunicated Pelagius at the request of the North African bishops (demonstrating papal authority as well). The Pope appealed not to St. Augustine in his condemnation of Pelagianism, but rather to the Catholic Church’s practice of infant baptism as the regula fidei. (Source)

I’ll end this refutation by using the words of St. Augustine himself, who wrote:

It was not I who devised the original sin, which the Catholic faith holds from ancient times; but you, who deny it, are undoubtedly an innovating heretic. In the judgment of God, all are in the devil's power, born in sin, unless they are regenerated in Christ.” - St. Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence, Book II:25


I don’t have the time to refute all the errors contained in that Wikipedia post, but needless to say St. Augustine was certainly no proto-Calvinist and was certainly not “converted in 412 to the stoic view that man had no free will except to sin… ” whereby he somehow denied free will. To the contrary, the Doctor of Grace wrote many works before and after 412 affirming that man has free will! (e.g. On Grace and Free Will; On the Predestination of the Saints; On the Gift of Perseverance, etc.). Augustine is the antithesis of Calvinism!
 
No problem.
I checked.
Part 1 was just YOUR post so you could know what I was responding to.

Part 2 is MY reply to you.

A post can't be more than 10,000 words long.
I could speak 10,000 words just to say good night....

We were discussing Augustine. You put a lot out there and I can't handle "carpet bombing". So I posted on him because I think I know him pretty well.

I realized that in my reply to you, as I had to cut out your control-v Wikipedia paste job in my reply.

Yes, we were discussing St. Augustine as you tried to use him but you were seemingly unaware that he taught and believed in baptismal regeneration. He explicitly wrote that being baptized = being born again.
 
I realized that in my reply to you, as I had to cut out your control-v Wikipedia paste job in my reply.

Yes, we were discussing St. Augustine as you tried to use him but you were seemingly unaware that he taught and believed in baptismal regeneration. He explicitly wrote that being baptized = being born again.
Here's the deal W,
I don't know how else to say this...
I really don't like Augustine...
and thus I'm not too interested in what he said.

I know I posted a lot and we don't have to talk about him...
in fact I hope we don't.

But I've lost track of our discussion...
Put me back on track or we could let it go till next time....
I do enjoy discussing with you....
 
Here's the deal W,
I don't know how else to say this...
I really don't like Augustine...
and thus I'm not too interested in what he said.

I know I posted a lot and we don't have to talk about him...
in fact I hope we don't.

But I've lost track of our discussion...
Put me back on track or we could let it go till next time....
I do enjoy discussing with you....

Well this thread, which you started, is just barely two pages long. If you don't want to go back one page and read where this began, then I'll do my best to summarize for you...

Your OP asks a question. I provided an answer. You then asked how we know we are born again. I provided an answer from Jesus' words in John 3:5. You disagreed and tried to use Augustine to support your assertion. I demonstrated Augustine was in my camp, not yours. Now here we are...
 
Well this thread, which you started, is just barely two pages long. If you don't want to go back one page and read where this began, then I'll do my best to summarize for you...

Your OP asks a question. I provided an answer. You then asked how we know we are born again. I provided an answer from Jesus' words in John 3:5. You disagreed and tried to use Augustine to support your assertion. I demonstrated Augustine was in my camp, not yours. Now here we are...
I feel silly W.
It's 11:30 pm here.
Can we continue tomorrow?
I used Augustine to prove a point of MINE???
CAN'T BE!!!
Will go through this in the morning.
Just quick:
All the Fathers believed we're born needing a savior.
Adam was the first sinner and we inherited this sin...call it the sin nature...call it original sin.

Augustine did not invent what I just posted...but he DID state that babies are born with O.S. and will go to hell unless they are baptized to remove it. This is not why babies were baptized before him.

Also, I believe the ECF go up to the Nicene Creed and not after. The church became different after it became involved in politics and state affairs.

Tomorrow....
 
The Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, Romans 8:16




JLB
But what does that mean?
Do we feel differently?
Do we change?
How does one Spirit speak to another spirit?
 
I feel silly W.
It's 11:30 pm here.
Can we continue tomorrow?
I used Augustine to prove a point of MINE???
CAN'T BE!!!
Will go through this in the morning.
Just quick:
All the Fathers believed we're born needing a savior.
Adam was the first sinner and we inherited this sin...call it the sin nature...call it original sin.

Yes, and if there is no original sin, there is no need for a savior.

("Sin nature" is a Calvinist notion. It is not synonymous with original sin, which is actually a deprivation.)

Augustine did not invent what I just posted...but he DID state that babies are born with O.S. and will go to hell unless they are baptized to remove it. This is not why babies were baptized before him.

Also, I believe the ECF go up to the Nicene Creed and not after. The church became different after it became involved in politics and state affairs.

Tomorrow....

No one is debating St. Augustine's view that unbaptized babies go to hell. That is not what we are discussing. Rather, we are discussing whether being born again = being baptized. This was the regula fidei of Christianity until the anabaptists came on the scene in the 16th century.

Furthermore, I gave you examples in the first page of St. Paul and the Church Fathers prior to Nicea affirming original sin and man's need to be born again, that is, baptized and regenerated. Here they are, again...

First Century ---> "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned. For until the law sin was in the world; but sin was not imputed, when the law was not. But death reigned from Adam unto Moses, even over them also who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who is a figure of him who was to come." - St. Paul to the Romans, 5:12-14

Second Century ---> "But this is Adam, if the truth should be told, the first formed man, of whom the Scripture says that the Lord spoke, Let Us make man after Our own image and likeness; (Genesis 1:26) and we are all from him: and as we are from him, therefore have we all inherited his title. But inasmuch as man is saved, it is fitting that he who was created the original man should be saved. For it is too absurd to maintain, that he who was so deeply injured by the enemy, and was the first to suffer captivity, was not rescued by Him who conquered the enemy, but that his children were, — those whom he had begotten in the same captivity." - St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III:23:2

Third Century ---> "In expressing vexation, contempt, or abhorrence, you have Satan constantly upon your lips; the very same we hold to be the angel of evil, the source of error, the corrupter of the whole world, by whom in the beginning man was entrapped into breaking the commandment of God. And (the man) being given over to death on account of his sin, the entire human race, tainted in their descent from him, were made a channel for transmitting his condemnation." - Tertullian, The Soul's Testimony, 3

---> "The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit." Origin, Commentaries on Romans 5:9

---> "But again, if even to the greatest sinners, and to those who had sinned much against God, when they subsequently believed, remission of sins is granted — and nobody is hindered from baptism and from grace— how much rather ought we to shrink from hindering an infant, who, being lately born, has not sinned, except in that, being born after the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of the ancient death at its earliest birth, who approaches the more easily on this very account to the reception of the forgiveness of sins— that to him are remitted, not his own sins, but the sins of another." - St. Cyprian, Epistle 58:5


As you can see, it is the same faith and same Church prior to Nicea as post Nicea.
 
Yes, and if there is no original sin, there is no need for a savior.

("Sin nature" is a Calvinist notion. It is not synonymous with original sin, which is actually a deprivation.)
Yes. By O.S. we mean Adam's first sin for which we're all still paying... If there was no fall, there would be no need for salvation. We'd still all have the preternatural gifts God gave to Adam and Eve.

As to sin nature: It's also a non-calvinistic concept which is found in the N.T.
Romans 7:20 This is speaking about the sin nature.
In Catholicism it's called concupiscence. It's just what is in us that makes us tend toward sin (until we are born again).



No one is debating St. Augustine's view that unbaptized babies go to hell. That is not what we are discussing. Rather, we are discussing whether being born again = being baptized. This was the regula fidei of Christianity until the anabaptists came on the scene in the 16th century.

Furthermore, I gave you examples in the first page of St. Paul and the Church Fathers prior to Nicea affirming original sin and man's need to be born again, that is, baptized and regenerated. Here they are, again...
Yes W, we were discussing:

1. You said we are born again by water and spirit.
I disagreed.

2. In post no. 13, you said:

Baptism ALONE makes a person born again. (This includes a baptism of desire and a baptism of blood.)

I believe what you're saying is that once we are baptized we are born again?

When Jesus said by water and spirit...some theologians believe He meant amniotic water...natural birth...and that we ALSO need to be born from above (born again).

The CC teaches that the water is, in fact, water baptism and the spirit is the regeneration, born from above, repentance and acceptance of God...whatever you want to call it.
John 3:5

My point was that just because someone is baptized does not mean he is born again and headed toward heaven. I explained how the person, as an adult, must accept this baptism and must understand what it means to be born from above.

Are you disagreeing?
Are you saying all baptized babies go to heaven?


First Century ---> "Wherefore as by one man sin entered into this world, and by sin death; and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned. For until the law sin was in the world; but sin was not imputed, when the law was not. But death reigned from Adam unto Moses, even over them also who have not sinned after the similitude of the transgression of Adam, who is a figure of him who was to come." - St. Paul to the Romans, 5:12-14
Then I said Augustine created a problem with the "invention" of Original Sin. You said I misrepresented him...I'm not sure why...but you proceeded to show me how O.S. was known before him.

I did not mean that the CONCEPT was not known...but it was HE who made a doctrine out of it,, or at least his ideas were adopted by the church and it became doctrine.

So I'll just go through each of what you posted...

No problem with Romans 5:12.
It's explaining how sin entered into the world.

Second Century ---> "But this is Adam, if the truth should be told, the first formed man, of whom the Scripture says that the Lord spoke, Let Us make man after Our own image and likeness; (Genesis 1:26) and we are all from him: and as we are from him, therefore have we all inherited his title. But inasmuch as man is saved, it is fitting that he who was created the original man should be saved. For it is too absurd to maintain, that he who was so deeply injured by the enemy, and was the first to suffer captivity, was not rescued by Him who conquered the enemy, but that his children were, — those whom he had begotten in the same captivity." - St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book III:23:2
I DO like Irenaeus.
I'm not even sure why you posted this.


Third Century ---> "In expressing vexation, contempt, or abhorrence, you have Satan constantly upon your lips; the very same we hold to be the angel of evil, the source of error, the corrupter of the whole world, by whom in the beginning man was entrapped into breaking the commandment of God. And (the man) being given over to death on account of his sin, the entire human race, tainted in their descent from him, were made a channel for transmitting his condemnation." - Tertullian, The Soul's Testimony, 3
I like Tertullian too.
It states above that the human race was TAINTED and made a channel for his condemnation.

Correct. It's what I said....
We suffer from the effects of Adam's sin...
We are not held PERSONALLY responsible for it...
Which is what AUGUSTINE taught....

I agree with Tertullian.

---> "The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sin, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit." Origin, Commentaries on Romans 5:9
Same comment Tertullian made.
We have the STAIN of sin.
The concept of O.S. existed before Augustine, but you cannot deny that it was he who completed the thought and made it acceptable throughout the church.

Here's another copy v you might want to read:
BTW, I also have not learned this way,,,but it helps at times to post links....This one explains really well my thoughts on this...


Augustine of Hippo’s notion of peccatum originale did not come out of the blue. In the scholarly discussion about the ‘traditional’ or ‘innovative’ character of Augustine’s doctrine of original sin, G. Bonner and M. Hollingworth argued for its specifically African roots. In order to evaluate the possible ‘Africanness’ of Augustine’s concept of peccatum originale, the current article addresses the two main protagonists of African theological thinking before Augustine: Tertullian (2nd/3rd c.) and Cyprian (3rd c.). They explicitly reflected on (infant) baptism and (the Adamic) sin, issues relevant for the doctrine of original sin, and Augustine refers to their writings for this reason. Did Tertullian and Cyprian lay the foundations of the doctor gratiae’s highly sophisticated doctrine of original sin? To answer this question, we gathered as exhaustively as possible all available evidence. Processing this quite elaborate collection of sources shows that Tertullian and Cyprian created a conceptual framework in which it was possible for Augustine to develop all aspects of his doctrine of original sin, some of which differed considerably from the positions of Tertullian and Cyprian, including also some of the extreme implications of the Augustinian view.

source: https://www.brepolsonline.net/doi/abs/10.1484/J.REA.4.2017071


---> "But again, if even to the greatest sinners, and to those who had sinned much against God, when they subsequently believed, remission of sins is granted — and nobody is hindered from baptism and from grace— how much rather ought we to shrink from hindering an infant, who, being lately born, has not sinned, except in that, being born after the flesh according to Adam, he has contracted the contagion of the ancient death at its earliest birth, who approaches the more easily on this very account to the reception of the forgiveness of sins— that to him are remitted, not his own sins, but the sins of another." - St. Cyprian, Epistle 58:5
Please note that even here, above, it states the child is forgiven the sins of another...


As you can see, it is the same faith and same Church prior to Nicea as post Nicea.
I do not believe we have the same CC before and after Nicea.

It might be the way we studied history...
It might be a particular slant of mine, having seen for myself how the church affected some areas here in Italy (and in Europe).

My point was that baptism does not save.
We are saved and baptism is necessary, but other factors must be present for salvation to be valid...not baptism alone.
(unless I misunderstood you).

Babies were always baptized...but it was not believed they'd go to hell if they weren't.
 
The Mormons call this a "burning in the bosom." It's how they tell they are saved.
Reminds me of the Road to Emmaus.
Luke 24:32
They said to one another, "Were not our hearts burning within us while He was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?"
 
Yes. By O.S. we mean Adam's first sin for which we're all still paying... If there was no fall, there would be no need for salvation. We'd still all have the preternatural gifts God gave to Adam and Eve.

Indeed.

As to sin nature: It's also a non-calvinistic concept which is found in the N.T.
Romans 7:20 This is speaking about the sin nature.
In Catholicism it's called concupiscence. It's just what is in us that makes us tend toward sin (until we are born again).

I disagree. Concupiscence is not synonymous with the Calvinist concept of man having a sin nature. Concupiscence is an effect of original sin. (You alluded to it above, as man no longer has integrity as a result of the loss of the preternatural gifts.)

Remember that original sin is a deprivation; the lack of grace due to the fall of Adam. This does not mean man has a sin nature. In fact there are many logical and serious theological errors belief in a sin nature would pose. For example...

1. If would make God the author of sin. By stating that man is born with a sin nature, that means man's Creator creates something sinful. Consequently, with each subsequent conception, God would be creating and bringing more sin into the world.

2. It would mean that sin is not a voluntary act of the will and thus no guilt can be assigned to man for simply acting according to his nature.

3. It would mean that Christ Himself assumed a sin nature. (Hebrews 2:14-18)




Part I of IV
 
Last edited:
Back
Top