In Calvinism why are the sinners God made responsible for what God has made them?

[Jethro Bodine]

Your theology of FREE WILL is a farce. There is no verse in the bible saying man has free will save FREE WILL offerings which is irrelevant. Few proponents can even give a definition.

Free will means man is given freedom of choice to believe and receive the gospel, or reject it, when God calls them.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

As usual no scripture is offered to backup your claim. I think many of you people have your own idea of what God is and then make up doctrine to go with unfounded ideas.

Psalms 51:5 I was brought forth in [a state of] wickedness; In sin my mother conceived me [and from my beginning I, too, was sinful].
Psalm 58:3 The ungodly are perverse and estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they are born, speaking lies.
John 14:4, John 3:6 (not as explicitly obvious.

David did not sin from the womb. And even if he did, he still had years to go until he was accountable for his sin.

All men sin and die BECAUSE all men eventually sin. Not because you have sin reckoned to you from the womb.

12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, so also death was passed on to all men, because all sinned (not because it is reckoned to them from the womb). 13For sin was in the world before the law was given; but sin is not taken into account when there is no law. Romans 5:12-13

I'm curious what sin a baby has reckoned to him the moment he is born...adultery? Lying? Stealing, perhaps? None, of course. He can't even hold his own head up.

 

[stovebolts]

Let's concentrate on "sin nature" and not freewill for the time being . Don't want to derail the thread .

Hi,
I’m sure you and I are on te same page. However, I want to clear up a possible misunderstanding which is common.

Calvinism leans on Augustine’s Original Sin which developed into Total Depravity. In essence, they use Psalm 51 to support their theology with no regard to Psalm 139.

The sin nature has a different nuance than Original sin. Original sin says we inherited Adams sin. On the contrary, the sin nature to which Paul speaks is to say that if given time and opportunity, we will sin, just as Adam and Eve eventually sinned.

Unlike Original sin, we are beautifully and wonderfully made, spotless from sin, yet into a sinful world where given the opportunity, we will eventually sin. This is also what we call free will because what will start as a sin done in ignorance such as Eves sin, we eventually become willfully disobedient like Adam.

 

[hawkman]

Hi,
I’m sure you and I are on te same page. However, I want to clear up a possible misunderstanding which is common.

Calvinism leans on Augustine’s Original Sin which developed into Total Depravity. In essence, they use Psalm 51 to support their theology with no regard to Psalm 139.

The sin nature has a different nuance than Original sin. Original sin says we inherited Adams sin. On the contrary, the sin nature to which Paul speaks is to say that if given time and opportunity, we will sin, just as Adam and Eve eventually sinned.

Unlike Original sin, we are beautifully and wonderfully made, spotless from sin, yet into a sinful world where given the opportunity, we will eventually sin. This is also what we call free will because what will start as a sin done in ignorance such as Eves sin, we eventually become willfully disobedient like Adam.

Ahh , I have heard " sin nature" and "original sin" used interchangeably (maybe just me ) . Thanks for pointing out the nuance of the difference between the two . I have read about Augustine . We are on the same page .

 

[GodsGrace]

Why did David say what he did in Psalm 51 and what did he mean by it ? It is does not support "sin nature" . I read this article at this link I am going to give you . I read the article for the first time out loud to my wife and as I read it the Holy Spirit let me know it was the truth .
Read the article out loud and see what happens .

Nitzevet, Mother of David The bold voice of silence

Indeed, psalm 51 is many times misunderstood.
Some take it to mean that David was born with the sin nature...instead it's speaking about his mother conceiving him in sin. Or, at least, in a dishonest way.

You posted the best article I've ever read on the story!

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi,
I’m sure you and I are on te same page. However, I want to clear up a possible misunderstanding which is common.

Calvinism leans on Augustine’s Original Sin which developed into Total Depravity. In essence, they use Psalm 51 to support their theology with no regard to Psalm 139.

The sin nature has a different nuance than Original sin. Original sin says we inherited Adams sin. On the contrary, the sin nature to which Paul speaks is to say that if given time and opportunity, we will sin, just as Adam and Eve eventually sinned.

Unlike Original sin, we are beautifully and wonderfully made, spotless from sin, yet into a sinful world where given the opportunity, we will eventually sin. This is also what we call free will because what will start as a sin done in ignorance such as Eves sin, we eventually become willfully disobedient like Adam.

Original sin meant only the original sin that was committed by Adam.

It was not until Augustine, in the 400's that the understanding of it was changed by his writings.
He changed the teaching to state that man was actually imputed with Adam's sin of disobedience, as you stated.

This teaching was wrong and not accepted by the CC to this day,,,we are responsible only for our own sins and not those of our fathers.

The history is a bit more complicated, but basically this is what happened.

This is why babies are baptized in the CC.
An old habit caused by him.

Augustine was gnostic and took some ideas with him when he converted to Catholicism.

Sad indeed.

 

[GodsGrace]

Ahh , I have heard " sin nature" and "original sin" used interchangeably (maybe just me ) . Thanks for pointing out the nuance of the difference between the two . I have read about Augustine . We are on the same page .

In Catholicism the sin nature is referred to as concupiscense. But they understand sin nature too.

 

[jaybo]

Indeed, psalm 51 is many times misunderstood.
Some take it to mean that David was born with the sin nature...instead it's speaking about his mother conceiving him in sin. Or, at least, in a dishonest way.

You posted the best article I've ever read on the story!

Psalm 51:1-5, "Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy,
blot out my transgressions.
Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin.
For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
Against you, you alone, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you are justified in your sentence
and blameless when you pass judgment.
Indeed, I was born guilty,
a sinner when my mother conceived me." (NRSVue)

Clearly David regarded himself as a sinner from his conception. It doesn't say anything about his mother conceiving him in sin.

 

[GodsGrace]

Psalm 51:1-5, "Have mercy on me, O God,
according to your steadfast love;
according to your abundant mercy,
blot out my transgressions.
Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity,
and cleanse me from my sin.
For I know my transgressions,
and my sin is ever before me.
Against you, you alone, have I sinned
and done what is evil in your sight,
so that you are justified in your sentence
and blameless when you pass judgment.
Indeed, I was born guilty,
a sinner when my mother conceived me." (NRSVue)

Clearly David regarded himself as a sinner from his conception. It doesn't say anything about his mother conceiving him in sin.

Do you believe a baby is born guilty, in sin?
If so, then I hope you also believe in infant baptism.

 

[GodsGrace]

jaybo

Please see post 239 and read the link.
It explains Psalm 51 really well.

 

[jaybo]

Do you believe a baby is born guilty, in sin?
If so, then I hope you also believe in infant baptism.

Yes, I believe that all babies are descendants of Adam and have inherited his sin nature. I don't believe in infant baptism, as I believe it is a statement of one's belief that their sin nature is dead and buried, and that they are a new creation in Christ.

Romans 3:10-18...

“There is no one who is righteous, not even one;
there is no one who has understanding;
there is no one who seeks God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
there is no one who shows kindness;
there is not even one.”
“Their throats are opened graves;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of vipers is under their lips.”
“Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
“Their feet are swift to shed blood;
ruin and misery are in their paths,
and the way of peace they have not known.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Romans 6:4, "Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life.

I do not believe that God holds the sin nature of an infant against him/her. He is a forgiving God and would never do that. Once a child becomes conscious of sin and continues to sin regardless, s/he is then responsible for their behavior. Bar/bat mitzvah occurs at age 13 in Judaism. Christian confirmation generally occurs at the same age, so my best guess is that 13 is the age at which one is held accountable for their actions.

 

[GodsGrace]

Yes, I believe that all babies are descendants of Adam and have inherited his sin nature. I don't believe in infant baptism, as I believe it is a statement of one's belief that their sin nature is dead and buried, and that they are a new creation in Christ.

Having the sin nature is different than being imputed with Adam's sin of disobedience.
I don't know of any mainline church that believes we are imputed with Adam's sin.

Romans 3:10-18...

“There is no one who is righteous, not even one;
there is no one who has understanding;
there is no one who seeks God.
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless;
there is no one who shows kindness;
there is not even one.”
“Their throats are opened graves;
they use their tongues to deceive.”
“The venom of vipers is under their lips.”
“Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”
“Their feet are swift to shed blood;
ruin and misery are in their paths,
and the way of peace they have not known.”
“There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

Romans 6:4, "Therefore we were buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life.

I do not believe that God holds the sin nature of an infant against him/her. He is a forgiving God and would never do that. Once a child becomes conscious of sin and continues to sin regardless, s/he is then responsible for their behavior. Bar/bat mitzvah occurs at age 13 in Judaism. Christian confirmation generally occurs at the same age, so my best guess is that 13 is the age at which one is held accountable for their actions.

Of course God doesn't hold sins against an infant or young child, because they have no sins.
They don't even know what a sin is.
And they will not be held accountable until they do...
The age in the CC is not 13; it's different for every person.

 

[jaybo]

Having the sin nature is different than being imputed with Adam's sin of disobedience.
I don't know of any mainline church that believes we are imputed with Adam's sin.


Of course God doesn't hold sins against an infant or young child, because they have no sins.
They don't even know what a sin is.
And they will not be held accountable until they do...
The age in the CC is not 13; it's different for every person.

What, in your opinion, is the difference between the sin nature and being imputed with Adam's sin? Adam (and Eve) sinned and disobeyed God's command not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Why did they disobey God? Because they were created with the sin nature, which has been inherited by all their descendants, i.e., all people (with one obvious exception!). Sin is imputed to all humans by Adam, righteousness is imputed to all believers by Jesus Christ. I'm not concerned with what "mainline churches" believe, only what the Bible says.

Romans 5:13-15, "for before the law was given, sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin when there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who did not sin in the same way that Adam (who is a type of the coming one) transgressed. But the gracious gift is not like the transgression. For if the many died through the transgression of the one man, how much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ multiply to the many!"

Again, sin is imputed to all humans by Adam, righteousness is imputed to all believers by Jesus Christ.

Secondly, all children sin. With one obvious exception, there hasn't been a single child who hasn't told a lie, been disobedient to parents and/or teachers, etc. Every child has sinned and every child has been punished by their parents. Why? Because they have inherited the sin nature from Adam. If any person has inherited Adam's sin nature then they have no need of a Savior. Jesus died to pay the penalty for everyone's sins. There is no such thing as a totally innocent person.

 

[Fastfredy0]

RE: "Are we born with sin , no we are not"

In post 240 you're switching you're initial statement which said nothing specifically about our "sin nature" (post 224)

I will remind you about what you said:

Are we born with sin , no we are not . Are we born into a world with sin all around us from the instance we are born, yes !
We have freewill so we will fall into sin as we grow up . A product of our sinful culture and a fallen world.
No baby is born with sin . [Post 224]

See, no where is SIN NATURE mentioned.
You did say:

Are we born with sin , no we are not .

This is not rocket science. Either we are born with sin or not.
Premise 1: The bible is true
Premise 2: Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3
Conclusion: Your statement is false .... no further discussion needed IMO. Now, maybe you meant to say something else or bring the "sin nature" into the discussion, but you didn't so don't add that thought to clear up the mess on aisle 7 you made. (IMO) Now, maybe you don't think Job 14:4; Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, John 3:6 contradict your statement that man does not come into this world in sin; then go ahead and exegete the verses for us.

Let's concentrate on "sin nature" and not freewill for the time being .

RE: Your post 224 mentioned Free Will so I responded". I felt free to speak about the subject matter you brought up. Now you wish to exclude it. That is not consistent. But, whatever.

Let's concentrate on "sin nature" and not freewill for the time being .

Now, if you want to amend your original statement that said "Are we born with sin , no we are not" which I believe I proved incorrect using scripture ... go ahead. Maybe you can bring in man's SIN NATURE" and clean up your original statement. I might even agree. But the statement you made is "Are we born with sin , no we are not" and that is what I addressed.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Free will means man is given freedom of choice to believe and receive the gospel, or reject it, when God calls them.

Gee, I gave you a chance to define FREE WILL already. As usual, I will have to help the person out that submit a FREE WILL definition. (Aside: you are welcome to submit any definition you like I suppose, but if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny, then what good is it.

Let's analyze you definition.

Hmmm... so free will in your opinion only applies to a choice to believe or not.....O.K., that seems limited, but whatever.

So you have:
Premise 1: God must call them (note: the definition of this call is lacking. Hopefully, it doesn't include the call of nature in Romans 1 that inclusivism proposes)
Premise 2: This is a choice to be saved or not
Premise 3: this is a FREE choice ..... FREE FROM WHAT!!!!!
Conclusion: You're definition is too obtuse to have meaning.

Like, your definition is so open ended that it would fit the Augustinian (Reformed) definition save that you limit it to salvation.
Reformed Theology believes you get to choose to be saved or not.
You will always choose what you desire most. (Augustine).

 

[Fastfredy0]

David did not sin from the womb

The bible does say we in sin from/before birth Psalms 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb; These go astray from birth, speaking lies [even twisted partial truths].

Logically, unless you can exegete Job 14:4; Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, John 3:6 differently, one would conclude that either you don't believe this part of the bible or one of us is confused as to what these verses mean. You have people giving you likes. Maybe they can explain how one is wicked from the womb and go astray from birth and yet do not sin.
Like, this is 1 + 1 = 2 logic.

 

[hawkman]

RE: "Are we born with sin , no we are not"

In post 240 you're switching you're initial statement which said nothing specifically about our "sin nature" (post 224)

I will remind you about what you said:

See, no where is SIN NATURE mentioned.
You did say:

This is not rocket science. Either we are born with sin or not.
Premise 1: The bible is true
Premise 2: Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3
Conclusion: Your statement is false .... no further discussion needed IMO. Now, maybe you meant to say something else or bring the "sin nature" into the discussion, but you didn't so don't add that thought to clear up the mess on aisle 7 you made. (IMO) Now, maybe you don't think Job 14:4; Psalm 51:5, Psalm 58:3, John 3:6 contradict your statement that man does not come into this world in sin; then go ahead and exegete the verses for us.


RE: Your post 224 mentioned Free Will so I responded". I felt free to speak about the subject matter you brought up. Now you wish to exclude it. That is not consistent. But, whatever.


Now, if you want to amend your original statement that said "Are we born with sin , no we are not" which I believe I proved incorrect using scripture ... go ahead. Maybe you can bring in man's SIN NATURE" and clean up your original statement. I might even agree. But the statement you made is "Are we born with sin , no we are not" and that is what I addressed.

A new born baby in the crib , where is the sin located in that child ? Is it a genetic problem ? (post#240)

You missed my question in post #240 . If you answer it maybe the confusion will begin to clear .

RE: "Are we born with sin , no we are not"

What I mean is the sin is not attached to us or inside us in anyway when we are born .

Do you believe the sin is attached to or inside us when we are born ?

 

[Fastfredy0]

Calvinism leans on Augustine’s Original Sin which developed into Total Depravity. In essence, they use Psalm 51 to support their theology with no regard to Psalm 139.

The sin nature has a different nuance than Original sin. Original sin says we inherited Adams sin. On the contrary, the sin nature to which Paul speaks is to say that if given time and opportunity, we will sin, just as Adam and Eve eventually sinned.

Unlike Original sin, we are beautifully and wonderfully made, spotless from sin, yet into a sinful world where given the opportunity, we will eventually sin. This is also what we call free will because what will start as a sin done in ignorance such as Eves sin, we eventually become willfully disobedient like Adam.

Re:

Unlike Original sin, we are beautifully and wonderfully made, spotless from sin,

This sounds like a Pelagian viewpoint.

What is original sin? | GotQuestions.org

What is original sin? Is the original sin of Adam and Eve applied to all of humanity?

www.gotquestions.org

Pelagianism: This view says that Adam’s sin had no effect upon the souls of his descendants other than that he provided a sinful example. Adam’s example has influenced those who followed him to also sin. But, according to this view, man has the ability to stop sinning if he simply chooses to. Pelagianism runs contrary to a number of passages that indicate man is hopelessly enslaved by his sins (apart from God’s intervention) and that his good works are “dead” or worthless in meriting God’s favor (Ephesians 2:1–2; Matthew 15:18–19; Romans 7:23; Hebrews 6:1; 9:14).

Arminianism: Arminians believe Adam’s original sin has resulted in the rest of mankind inheriting a corrupt, sinful nature, which causes us to sin in the same way that a cat’s nature causes it to meow—it comes naturally. According to this view, man cannot stop sinning on his own; God’s supernatural, enabling grace, called prevenient grace, in conjunction with the gospel, allows that person to choose to exercise faith in Christ. The teaching of prevenient grace is not explicitly found in Scripture.

Calvinism: The Calvinistic doctrine of original sin states that Adam’s sin has resulted not only in our having a sin nature, but also in our incurring guilt before God for which we deserve punishment. Being conceived with original sin upon us (Psalm 51:5) results in our inheriting a sin nature so wicked that Jeremiah 17:9 describes the human heart as “deceitful above all things and beyond cure.” Not only was Adam found guilty because he sinned, but his sin was imputed to us, making us guilty and deserving of his punishment (death) as well (Romans 5:12, 19). There are two views as to why Adam’s sin should be imputed to us. The first view states that the human race was within Adam in seed form; thus, when Adam sinned, we sinned in him. This is similar to the biblical teaching that Levi (a descendant of Abraham) paid tithes to Melchizedek in Abraham (Genesis 14:20; Hebrews 7:4–9), even though Levi was not born until hundreds of years later. The other main view is that Adam served as our representative, and so, when he sinned, we were found guilty as well.

 

[Fastfredy0]

What I mean is the sin is not attached to us or inside us in anyway when we are born .

Do you believe the sin is attached to or inside us when we are born ?

Yes, sin is attached to us from birth (in the womb).
It's not only what I believe but what the Bible teaches.

More proof (aside: not that I need more)
Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, .... ALL SINNED, BABIES are PART OF ALL, therefore babies sinned ...not rocket science, simple logic
Romans 5:12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned— BECAUSE ALL SINNED ... BABIES are PART OF ALL, therefore babies sinned ...not rocket science, simple logic

All these verses .... WHERE THE HECK ARE YOUR VERSES TO CONTRADICT MINE or How are my verses interpreted incorrectly???????????????

Give your biblical evidence !!!!

 

[jaybo]

Regarding predestination, what can be said about Paul's writing this?

"But who indeed are you, a human, to argue with God? Will what is molded say to the one who molds it, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the objects of wrath that are made for destruction," Romans 9:20-22

I am not a Calvinist, as I am not familiar with his doctrine, but this seems quite straight-forward regarding predestination.