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!

Are we born condemned with Adams sin...or innocent at birth?

Are we born condemned...or innocent?


  • Total voters
    13
Thus, the premise of this OP is simple. All are born with a sinful nature and as such, All require a savior to save them from their depravity.

I agree.
You said earlier that an infant had the propensity to sin, which is why they need a savior. My rebuttle is simple. If our Lord is just, why would he condemn the innocent for a sin they had not committed.
In our fallen state, with the sinful nature, we are not righteous. Unless we have the righteousness of Christ imputed to us we will not enter into heaven......the sin nature must be removed.
While every soul will be judged, it will be done justly. A child will not be condemned for the sins of others, including Adams.
The child is guilty of Adams sin as it was imputed to that child. That child must be sanctified, glorified and righteous if they are to enter into heaven. Only the blood of Jesus Christ can do that.
True, a child will face judgment. But it will be a just trial.
I agree. It appears a child or unborn will have a mens of applying the blood of Christ and restoring them from their fallen sinful nature.
 
i think there's a difference between God choosing to not hold one accountable and being genuinely Innocent. No human being is innocent, ever, under any circumstances, before a Holy and Just God.

The sin nature of humans must be removed. Restored to the pre-fall state.
 
hello Cygnus, dirtfarmer here

Genesis 5:3 says that we were born in the likeness and image of Adam after the fall. Adam was was a sinner after the fall , so that would make his offspring sinners. So, we are born with a nature to sin, a sinful nature.

Thank you for bringing that point to the table.
 
Cygnus
You have not shown how the sin nature is imputed from Adam.
You said the sin nature is two parts.
1. The propensity to sin.
2. The act of sin.

You have failed to show how an infant is guilty of sin.

It has been established that a child is not accountable for a father's sin and it is established that Adam was created with the propensity to sin, which he did resulting in death.

Perhaps God created us with a sin nature... aka freewill. We have the ability to make choices, even bad choices.

God himself makes choices and yes, God creates evil and even God can repent. Yet His nature is one of Love.
 
You have not shown how the sin nature is imputed from Adam.
You said the sin nature is two parts.
1. The propensity to sin.
2. The act of sin.

Just having a sin nature will prevent someone from entering into heaven. Just the fact that they are not righteous due to the sin nature will render them as lost. The sin nature must be dealt with. The sin nature is dark and can't stand in the presence of light. John 1:5. Acts 26:18

You have failed to show how an infant is guilty of sin

The infant is Quilty of having a sin nature.

Dirtfarmer put it very nicely....Genesis 5:3 says that we were born in the likeness and image of Adam after the fall. Adam was was a sinner after the fall , so that would make his offspring sinners. So, we are born with a nature to sin, a sinful nature.
Perhaps God created us with a sin nature... aka freewill. We have the ability to make choices, even bad choices.

That is not the definition of a sin nature. Adam was not created with a sin nature.....the sin nature came after or with the fall.
God himself makes choices and yes, God creates evil and even God can repent. Yet His nature is one of Love.
God doesn't Create evil.
 
I appreciate the time you spent writing this. And I am glad that we both come to the same conclusion that infants, children and if I may, mentally handicapped people will be found right in Christ.

I understand this topic to be one of being condemned to Hell from inception. If I am misunderstood, please correct me.

Thus, the premise of this OP is simple. All are born with a sinful nature and as such, All require a savior to save them from their depravity.

You said earlier that an infant had the propensity to sin, which is why they need a savior. My rebuttle is simple. If our Lord is just, why would he condemn the innocent for a sin they had not committed.

While every soul will be judged, it will be done justly. A child will not be condemned for the sins of others, including Adams.

True, a child will face judgment. But it will be a just trial.

Now then, we are talking about having a sinful nature. One is not found guilty until an offence is committed in either thought or action.

Please afford me one other comment as I ramble, and it is the highest concern I have. You posted a verse from Romans 5 highlighting all sinned touting context with the agenda of supporting a sinful nature.

While I believe we have a sinful nature, I tried to bring the proper context to the verse you posted. That verse does not address people at an individual level. The all that you bolded was at the national level. As such, it cannot be used properly as the individual level to show infants are guilty, let alone have committed a sin in the womb or at birth.

If you disagree with my explanation of Romans 5, please show me from Romans why the All is at the individual level.
I think it is about coming into this world condemned - under a curse so to speak. That is why, lets call them the "young"(infants, children, mentally young), need a Savior. If the young came into this world totally innocent, then died totally innocent, then they would not need a Savior - because they would not be judged for anything. But because we all come into existence with the propensity to sin - whether or not we have the chance to sin before we die - we ALL need a Savior to stand before God and declare us 'not guilty'.

If our Lord is just, why would he condemn the innocent for a sin they had not committed.
Because they are not innocent. This is where we must understand what sin is. Just because a young one has not 'committed' a sin, does not mean they are not 'turned' that direction at birth. Sin is missing the mark. ALL mankind, because of Adams willful disobedience, come into this world totally unable to hit the mark.

Think of it in archery terms. God has a 'target' and that is complete holiness. That target was obscured, blocked, when Adam disobeyed. Think of it this way, the mark was in the Garden - and now its impossible to hit it due to being unreachable. All mankind comes into this world with the inability to hit that mark. The very fact of coming into this world(existence in the physical realm) means you have zero chance to hit the mark.

The young ones do not have a chance to draw back their bow and fire, showing that they cannot hit the mark - but that does not negate the fact that it is impossible for them to. The fact they cannot hit the mark means they are condemned and need a Savior. We are not condemned because we sin, we sin because we are condemned.

Now, as far as what you are talking about, national vs personal level, its irregardless because if you hold a nation 'guilty' of something, then by implication all of its 'citizens'(persons) are also guilty. This is what Paul was trying to get across, its not just the people of Gentiles - or the people of Jews - but all people. He was making the point that you cannot be born out of the nature of sin - and if you cannot be born out of the nature, then you cannot escape it by death either.

Remember, we are not sinners because we sin - we sin being a direct result of being a human who is naturally turned in the direction of sin. Jesus, our Savior, turns us back to God - thereby making it possible to hit the mark. Even the young have to be turned to God - regardless if they have ever drawn their bow back to take a shot.

Jhn 3:3
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”


We cannot pass by this haphazardly. If a person is born once, they must be born again in order to see the kingdom of God. No one is excluded from this. Why? Because, that which is born into this world is flesh - there is no escaping that - and flesh cannot inherit the kingdom of God. Flesh is corrupt from the moment it enters the world, and it only shows this corruption by sins we see.

Jhn 3:6
That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit
 
I think it is about coming into this world condemned - under a curse so to speak. That is why, lets call them the "young"(infants, children, mentally young), need a Savior. If the young came into this world totally innocent, then died totally innocent, then they would not need a Savior - because they would not be judged for anything. But because we all come into existence with the propensity to sin - whether or not we have the chance to sin before we die - we ALL need a Savior to stand before God and declare us 'not guilty'.
10-4
 
Do children have to be taught to disobey?

I never taught my children to, they did it on their own from a very early age.

Are they guilty of sin? Even if they don't know God or the law of sin and death? I don't think so. We are not born with the knowledge of God and sin.

Adam knew God and he knew the commandment, but he didn't know sin until after he ate.

I agree man is evil - wilful, stubborn, disobedient. Even Jesus didn't claim he was good. "God alone is good." Was Adam good? I don't think so. I'd say he was innocent.
 
Last edited:
Best I can piece together so far


God gave the 1st Law to Adam/Humans Genesis 2:16-17
Which we proceeded to break, then we Rinse & Repeat.
Why would infants need a Savior/Saviour from the Serpent or the Law? Genesis 3:4-5
If A Savior Payed the Cost of the Judgement against Adam/Humans from His own death/resurrection forward
& released those held captive Matthew 27:51-53
from the Law Judgment & Sentence Genesis 3:16
that was handed down to Adam/Humans Genesis 3:17-24
& freed the innocent with No Knowledge of Good/Evil? Matthew 18:10 Deuteronomy 1:39
& then to free the future innocent for Eternal Life (Name in the Book of Life)? Revelation 21:27


Genesis 2:16–17 (KJV 1900)
16 And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: 17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Does a New Born know the difference between Good and Evil?
Has a New Born ate of the tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil?

Romans 5:12-21
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world,(Adam not Eve)
and death by sin; (eat tree you die & you sinned by breaking the Law)
and so death passed upon all men,(Adam unto Eve's childbirth, the sorrow of death passed Genesis 3:16)
for that (deed of conception Psalm 51:5)
all have sinned:
For until the Law (before Mosaic Law)
sin was in the world: (Before the Mosaic Law, sin was already in the World?)
but sin is not imputed when there is no law. (innocent)
Nevertheless
death reigned from Adam to Moses,(before Mosaic Laws death from Adam reigned)
even over them that had not sinned (innocent)
after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, Genesis 3:17-24
who is the figure of Him that was to come. (Grace, Virgin Birth bypasses Adam)
 
Last edited:
Are they guilty of sin? Even if they don't know God or the law of sin and death? I don't think so. We are not born with the knowledge of God and sin.

Adam knew God and he knew the commandment, but he didn't know sin until after he ate.

I agree man is evil - wilful, stubborn, disobedient. Even Jesus didn't claim he was good. "God alone is good." Was Adam good? I don't think so. I'd say he was innocent.
Actually, Adam was good.

Gen 1:31
And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.


As far as "guilty" of sin, it is focusing on the wrong thing. People will not spend eternity away from God because they sin, people sin because they are already separated from God. Sin is the 'evidence' of a persons separation from God. Humans are born into this world separated from God - and will continue in that state unless they have a Savior.

1Jo 3:10
By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.


Doing righteous things does not make you righteous, you do them because you already are. You sin because you are inclined to sin. Children do not all of a sudden decide to be sinners - they eventually show they are prone to sin by the sin they commit.
 
Actually, Adam was good.

Gen 1:31
And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.


As far as "guilty" of sin, it is focusing on the wrong thing. People will not spend eternity away from God because they sin, people sin because they are already separated from God. Sin is the 'evidence' of a persons separation from God. Humans are born into this world separated from God - and will continue in that state unless they have a Savior.

1Jo 3:10
By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.


Doing righteous things does not make you righteous, you do them because you already are. You sin because you are inclined to sin. Children do not all of a sudden decide to be sinners - they eventually show they are prone to sin by the sin they commit.

God saw his work was good. It was good as in well made, good workmanship, not morally good. Jesus said, "No one is good but God alone."

Mark 10:18
And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone.

So Adam was not good. I'd say he was innocent.
 
You shouldn't have to ask.
"Iniquity". Iniquity "in his conception". Just like it says. Does it say anything about Adam or chances???
Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.
Describe the sinful behavior called "iniquity".
How does someone do "iniquity"?
 
You shouldn't have to ask. "Iniquity".
Iniquity "in his conception". Just like it says. Does it say anything about Adam or chances???
Psalm 51:5 Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.
"Iniquity" is not a specific sin.
It is, as I said, a proclivity to sin.
From: Encyclopedias - International Standard Bible Encyclopedia - Iniquity
INIQUITY

In the Old Testament of the 11 words translated "iniquity," by far the most common and important is `awon (about 215 times). Etymologically, it is customary to explain it as meaning literally "crookedness," "perverseness," i.e. evil regarded as that which is not straight or upright, moral distortion (from `iwwah, "to bend," "make crooked," "pervert"). Driver, however (following Lagarde), maintains that two roots, distinct in Arabic, have been confused in Hebrew, one equals "to bend," "pervert" (as above), and the other equals "to err," "go astray"; that `awon is derived from the latter, and consequently expresses the idea of error, deviation from the right path, rather than that of perversion (Driver, Notes on Sam, 135 note) Whichever etymology is adopted, in actual usage it has three meanings which almost imperceptibly pass into each other:
(1) iniquity,
(2) guilt of iniquity,
(3) punishment of iniquity.

(my emphasis -->) Primarily, it denotes "not an action, but the character of an action" (Oehler), and is so distinguished from "sin" (chaTTa'th). Hence, we have the expression "the iniquity of my sin" (Psalms 32:5). Thus the meaning glides into that of "guilt," which might often take the place of "iniquity" as the translation of `awon (Genesis 15:16; Exodus 34:7; Jeremiah 2:22, etc.). From "guilt" it again passes into the meaning of "punishment of guilt," just as Latin piaculum may denote both guilt and its punishment. The transition is all the easier in Hebrew because of the Hebrew sense of the intimate relation of sin and suffering, e.g. Genesis 4:13, "My punishment is greater than I can bear"; which is obviously to be preferred to King James Version margin, the Revised Version, margin "Mine iniquity is greater than can be forgiven," for Cain is not so much expressing sorrow for his sin, as complaining of the severity of his punishment; compare 2 Kings 7:9 (the Revised Version (British and American) "punishment," the Revised Version margin "iniquity"); Isaiah 5:18 (where for "iniquity" we might have "punishment of iniquity," as in Leviticus 26:41,43, etc.); Isaiah 40:2 ("iniquity," the Revised Version margin "punishment"). The phrase "bear iniquity" is a standing expression for bearing its consequences, i.e. its penalty; generally of the sinner bearing the results of his own iniquity (Leviticus 17:16; 20:17,19; Numbers 14:34; Ezekiel 44:10, etc.), but sometimes of one bearing the iniquity of another vicariously, and so taking it away (e.g. Ezekiel 4:4; 18:19 f). Of special interest in the latter sense are the sufferings of the Servant of Yahweh, who shall "bear the iniquities" of the people (Isaiah 53:11; compare Isaiah 53:6).
 
Back
Top