Does original sin imply that we were created as sinful?

[kenan]

I've got just a few questions about original sin:

If you look at this link, it seems to say that we have a "sinful nature". This doesn't make sense to me: if we have a sinful nature, then that would imply that we were created as sinful, wouldn't it? Because before man's knowledge of good and evil, we still sinned, meaning that we did not choose to sin, we just did instinctively.

More questions will come to me as I'm debating this topic and a number of others on another forum (I hope this doesn't count as spam, but you can follow along here if you want. I post under "kenan6346" and I'm debating with "dark&broken") and he's been raising some difficult questions for me.

 

[kenan]

Also, did Adam and Eve know that they were sinning when they did so, as before they ate from the tree, they had no knowledge of good and evil.

edit:
I figure the mods will get mad if I keep double posting, so I'll just edit this one.

Here's another question, partially unrelated: how do we know that the feeling we have is God or Christ? For example, scientologists "know" that they've got a thetan inside that they have to remove by paying the higher ups and holding metal cans to their head.

 

[cyberjosh]

Whether or not Adam and Eve had a keen sense of what sin meant or not is up to debate (they were not born into sin like we were - yet God could have in-grained such moral principles), but one thing they would have known is that their eating of the fruit would be disobedience to God's explicit command. Also since God had told them that if they eat of the fruit of the tree they would surely die Adam and Eve may have looked at the issue from an adventageous versus disadvantageous perspective: disobedience (sin) causes death, and to die is not advantageous because we will cease to live and fulfill God's purpose for us. Therefore sin is disadvantageous. God orginally created everything "good", and it was in a healthy functioning order but sin severs ties of order and function, spiraling into disfunction and broken relationship with God.

I wrote a post on another forum once that I saved somewhere where I explored this advantageous/disadvantageous musing further. At the very least they knew there would be a consequence, even if they could not have predicted its outcome from experience.

Just some thoughts.

~Josh

 

[cyberjosh]

Here is my old post I made about this (quotation of another person in the discussion is in bold):

Besides, it still doesn't address Adam and Eve. How can people with no abilty to know right from wrong possibly be called "sinners"? It's not fair, and it's certainly not justice.

Well, your question I think lies along the lines of "Is disobedience still disobedience even if you didn't know better?" It's an interesting question actually. Parallely (in the same line of thought) I've heard people unintentionaly tell someone false information and then immediately apologize and say "Oops, I lied to you." I usually tell them that they didn't really lie, because it wasn't their intent. But that all depends on wether you define "lying" as intentionally giving misinformation. But one thing that God did tell them was not to eat from the tree of good & evil, so it's not like they were without warning, and God did tell them a definite consequence.

And I'm not sure if they originally looked upon it as "wrong" as much as disadventageous (inconvenient for them to die), although it's also an interesting question on what they thought death entailed (after-life considerations and all).

Something also interesting IMO is the comparison of "wrong" and something being disadventageous at that point in time. They were living God's abundant life, and in a great place to do it! Anything to counteract that great joyous life style was "wrong" at that point (from a certain point of view), while they were conscious ofthe next best thing to understanding wrong: "disadventageous".

Adam: "It's not beneficial to die."
God: "And it is not right to live life without the abundance I can give you, because it's always settling for second best."

And second best is what Adam and Eve chose, even though thier view of disadventageous turned to include "wrong".

P.S. That's one way to look at it anyways. I'm not infallible though.

Just a possible philosophical consideration.

~Josh

 

[kenan]

Whether or not Adam and Eve had a keen sense of what sin meant or not is up to debate (they were not born into sin like we were - yet God could have in-grained such moral principles), but one thing they would have known is that their eating of the fruit would be disobedience to God's explicit command. Also since God had told them that if they eat of the fruit of the tree they would surely die Adam and Eve may have looked at the issue from an adventageous versus disadvantageous perspective: disobedience (sin) causes death, and to die is not advantageous because we will cease to live and fulfill God's purpose for us. Therefore sin is disadvantageous. God orginally created everything "good", and it was in a healthy functioning order but sin severs ties of order and function, spiraling into disfunction and broken relationship with God.

I wrote a post on another forum once that I saved somewhere where I explored this advantageous/disadvantageous musing further. At the very least they knew there would be a consequence, even if they could not have predicted its outcome from experience.

Just some thoughts.

~Josh

I like the way you think ;) Thanks for that, advantageous vs. disadvantageous is a really good way of thinking about it. Cheers

 

[Edouard]

Original Sin.

orginal sin means that when we are born we already have sinned.
therefore that is why infant baptisms take place in protestant churches..

Perspective.

Creation: God created man and woman out of His own image (likeness).
When God was finished he said all was good.

Logic: if God is perfect how could his creation be created imperfect?
Angels: created beings of God to serve God, yet some rebelled. This reflects a choice.

Adam and Eve sin.
Cain and Abel are born. Are they born sinful? no. Are they born into an imperfect and sinful world ? yes.
Cain and Abel are still created in the likeness of God.. all of us are. So how could God create something that is sinful when he Knows no sin ? God is perfect in all His ways.

Now does this mean that we will reap the negative affects of our parents sin ? yes.
This I believe becomes a family sociological viewpoint and a social issue.

Final point.
Christ was born of a virgin birth.
So for one to not be born with original sin, must a woman be a virgin bearing a child?
If so, we have the technology. However, if you look at the covenants on marriage, I think we would see this is not true. He promised Abraham that his descendants would be as numerous as the sands of the seashore. IF this were to cause sin...why would God create this covenant.

Edouard.
God created man in his own image.
Praise be to God for knowing me before I was Born. Jeremiah 1.

 

[justvisiting]

Original Sin.

orginal sin means that when we are born we already have sinned.
therefore that is why infant baptisms take place in protestant churches..

Rom 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:
Rom 5:13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Rom 5:14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
Rom 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.

Perspective.

Creation: God created man and woman out of His own image (likeness).
When God was finished he said all was good.

Logic: if God is perfect how could his creation be created imperfect?
Angels: created beings of God to serve God, yet some rebelled. This reflects a choice.

God did create His creation perfect. That's exactly what free will is about. That is where Calvinism goes overboard. God did not plan the fall. He created creatures of choice. The glory is that we don't worship because we are robots...but we freely worship Him of our own will...because He has drawn us back to Him, through the atonement of Christ.

Adam and Eve sin.
Cain and Abel are born. Are they born sinful? no. Are they born into an imperfect and sinful world ? yes.
Cain and Abel are still created in the likeness of God.. all of us are. So how could God create something that is sinful when he Knows no sin ? God is perfect in all His ways.

Now does this mean that we will reap the negative affects of our parents sin ? yes.
This I believe becomes a family sociological viewpoint and a social issue.

Death passed upon all men...not sin. We are not responsible for Adam's sin. We are responsible for our own sin. It still works out about the same because we still need the redemption of Christ.

Final point.
Christ was born of a virgin birth.
So for one to not be born with original sin, must a woman be a virgin bearing a child?
If so, we have the technology. However, if you look at the covenants on marriage, I think we would see this is not true. He promised Abraham that his descendants would be as numerous as the sands of the seashore. IF this were to cause sin...why would God create this covenant.

The promise was made to Abraham, when the law did not even exist. It was a promise through FAITH...not Law. The law did not come until Moses. Christ's lineage traces all the way back to Abraham through Mary and Joseph.

Gal 3:16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.
Gal 3:17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.
Gal 3:18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.
Gal 3:19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
Gal 3:20 Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.
Gal 3:21 Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Gal 3:22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Edouard.
God created man in his own image.
Praise be to God for knowing me before I was Born. Jeremiah 1.

Well, that is true. He has foreknowledge as part of His choosing also.

 

[justvisiting]

Also, infant baptism is not necessary. The innocent will not be judged. God judges on what we know and what we do with what we know. Baptism is a sign before believers of repentance, and confession of our faith in Christ. To Christen or dedicate a child is alright. Something like what Hannah did with Samuel. That doesn't mean they will be Saved when they grow up. It's just a dedication unto the Lord. (As a prayer.)
There is no way that any Theologian is going to tell me that a 6 month old child is going to hell because of the sin of Adam. We are only judged on our own sins. That is why we need redemption.

To carry that further...If Esau had died as a baby...he would have been saved too.
Heb 12:16 Lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.
Esau's sin was not giving up his birthright...as far as I can see. The birthright was the right of inheritance from Isaac. Perhaps it meant more then, because Isaac may have told his children about the promise of Abraham...and his seed. Esau's biggest sins were fornication and profanity...and likely unbelief.

 

[kenan]

That's guys, I obviously have a lot of reading to do because I wasn't even aware of some of those verses you quoted. Cheers ;)

 

[Orion]

If Adam and Eve already knew that being disobedient was evil, then the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" was redundant and unnecessary. If they DIDN'T know that being disobedient was evil, not having eaten from said tree, then they could not have known that what they were doing was disobedient.

The whole story is ridiculous, though. Just so humans could have "free will", God allows a temptation tree to reside in a "perfect creation", and allows a tempter access to this "perfect creation". Some talking snake with legs, which is explained to be "satan possessing a snake", yet the snake gets punished for some reason. . . and looses its legs, . . . said it would "eat dust all the days of its life", . . . when in actuality, loosing its legs made it an even more stealthier preditor. . . . . . . . Forget the fact that primative minds saw snakes as evil, which was [no doubt] the reason why it was the one singled out in this story.

 

[Adullam]

We are born into this world with a fallen nature. We are not in fellowship with God. A breach has been made through the sin of Adam. God allows our survival nevertheless...at least until we are called to judgment. One needs the divine birth of a new nature to be reconnected with the Father.

Are we created as sinful? We are created away from God. We are therefore born in sin, according to the will of God. Our souls can be redeemed through the putting away of the old nature and the putting on of Christ in the inner man. Those who are led by the Spirit are free from the curse of fallen man.

 

[kenan]

If Adam and Eve already knew that being disobedient was evil, then the "tree of the knowledge of good and evil" was redundant and unnecessary. If they DIDN'T know that being disobedient was evil, not having eaten from said tree, then they could not have known that what they were doing was disobedient.

I think cybershark's post gives a good explanation on the matter.

The whole story is ridiculous, though. Just so humans could have "free will", God allows a temptation tree to reside in a "perfect creation", and allows a tempter access to this "perfect creation". Some talking snake with legs, which is explained to be "satan possessing a snake", yet the snake gets punished for some reason. . . and looses its legs, . . . said it would "eat dust all the days of its life", . . . when in actuality, loosing its legs made it an even more stealthier preditor. . . . . . . . Forget the fact that primative minds saw snakes as evil, which was [no doubt] the reason why it was the one singled out in this story.

Uh huh...

 

[Edouard]

Interesting.

Just Visting than you for proving my points with scripture.

A couple of question towards the end of your last post.

Who creates the infants that are born?
When they are born are they born perfect or haev they sinned within seconds of being born??

Romans is talking about how we have all sinned. right?

Sinn is an action! At what age does a infant or a child sinn against God?

When it is born or when it commits sinn??

If we look at Adam and Eve they were adults in life but infants to God's wisdom.

So must one be at an age to know what sin is whether that be 3, 4 or 5?
Or must one be at an age of understanding like 12 or 13 ?

I do not wish to enter the conversation on infant baptism due to the history of this forum with that topic. I brought that up due to the concept of original sin. That is why Catholic's practice infant baptism then conformation at a later age.

The question I am bringing forth is Creation vs. sin.

when do you believe one has sinned.
There is a distinction being born perfect into a sinful world. Or being born with sin into a sinful world.

Jeremiah 1.

Edouard.
FYI - I know I am formerly new to this forum. I used to frequent here a couple of yrs. Life changes with jobs in such. I am a non-denominational Christian. My wife is Roman Catholic. Yes we do go to church together. We currently attend a semi-charismatic church. I am waiting to see some beliefs stated to unfold. Anyway. I am preacher's son. My father is a minister for the church of christ.
I look forward to positive conversation on God's word. God bless you all. Peace and Grace be with you.

 

[justvisiting]

I don't know that there is such a thing as a specific age of accountability. I can only say God looks on the heart...and the sooner a child acknowledges God the better. He is a just judge. I am sure His wrath will not be shown upon those that knew nothing.
Jesus himself said in the gospels...of such are the kingdom of God...children.
We have a fallen nature, but we still answer for our own sins, not the sins of our father's or Adam.
Some of the best Christians I have seen are 7 year olds. They know nothing else but that God is good...and God is Jesus. I was there once myself. I remember one mother testifying about how her daughter's prayers were answered more than hers. God loves children.

 

[Ben Joiner]

I think it means that man is imperfect because he doesn't understand God fully in order to be perfect. God put man on the path to becoming more like Him and started man with a simple, don't eat that command. Man freely rejected this simple command and so his lost his connection to becoming more like God. His children have inherited this disconnect but the disconnect brought a greater (but incomplete) understanding of Good and Evil. Every person then rejects what they know of God, instead of calling to God to get back on the path of greater understanding of Him. This rejection gets turned around because it illustrates the need to get on the right path with God with the grossness of our evil. Thereby making the need for our Saviour most obvious.

 

[veteran]

Don't mean to throw a crowbar in the middle of popular ideas of original sin, but consider this. How would God have reconciliated us to Him if Adam and Eve had not sinned? How would have Christ been sent to die on the cross without sin in the world? Even though we know God did not create Adam and Eve in sin, we know Salvation had to come by it.

Our Lord Jesus in Revelation promised to those who overcome through Him, access to the Tree of Life in the midst of the Garden. Because it was not yet time to overcome through Christ during the days of Adam and Eve, the Tree of Life was closed off to them, otherwise they'd had eternal life then without Christ's Blood shed on the cross. That's when man's sin was literally born and imparted to all born flesh, except Christ Jesus The Saviour (1 Cor.15:20-22). Yet there's another part of the equation that mustn't be left out.

But who actually was responsible for the first sin? Satan was, when he first rebelled against God. That happenned prior to Adam and Eve in God's Garden, for we know Satan was originally created good, but became evil, and to him God assigned the very idea of 'death' (Heb.2:14). God told Adam and Eve that the day they ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they would die. This is why the idea of death is also assigned to the idea of sin. So to properly understand the idea of original sin, what Satan did before must be weighed and understood when looking at the Eden events of Gen.2 & 3.

Satan first appears as "that old serpent" in Eden to Adam and Eve. There he is already in his role as temptor and adversary. By then God had already judged and sentenced him to perish, thus the idea of the power of death being assigned to him. That also shows God's Salvation Plan was already formulated by the time Adam was formed in God's Garden. The need to send His Son was already in the works, even prior to Adam and Eve's sin. That's what the NT idea is about those chosen before the foundation of the world, as Christ was. It all goes back to the event of Satan's rebellion against God as the start of sin, and Christ's death on the cross and resurrection as the end of sin.

And though Christ crucified defeated death and the devil per Hebrews 2:14, Satan and death is yet to perish. Only once Satan, death, hell, and the wicked are perished can there be a return to how things were prior to Satan's rebellion.

 

[Ben Joiner]

I'm guessing your saying something about God being prepared for our sin means that we aren't free not to? The idea of a God existing outside of time throws a new light on that. The concept was proposed by Augustan in response to the question, "What was God doing before He made the world?" But the concept is clearly there in John1:3 and in the very, "I Am" concept behind the name "Yahweh."

Logically, God could not have existed for an eternal amount of time into the past. I cannot sit and wait until I reach a day infinitely far away. The only way to reach that day is to move through time with infinite speed. If that happens, then today and that last day are happening at the same time. Today, being at the end of an eternal past is therefore impossible. This means that time began at some point in the past and that God must exist outside of time. If He does, then He sees everything at the same time. Everything is happening simultaneously so He wouldn't coordinate future events based on His control of present ones. Rather, they are both happening at the same time, and so the future action and the past preparation are in total harmony.

John 8 : 57"You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!"

58"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" 59At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.