Original Sin

[ttg]

Vic asked in another post about original sin and righfully mentioned that it should be in a separate thread. My apologies for letting the other thread slip off topic.

I Reckon Sow, here is the scriptural basis for original sin.

Romans 5:12-18

Death Through Adam, Life Through Christ
12Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned 13for before the law was given, sin was in the world. But sin is not taken into account when there is no law. 14Nevertheless, death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who was a pattern of the one to come.
15But the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God's grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! 16Again, the gift of God is not like the result of the one man's sin: The judgment followed one sin and brought condemnation, but the gift followed many trespasses and brought justification. 17For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God's abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ.

18Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.

 

[Vic C.]

Vic asked in another post about original sin and righfully mentioned that it should be in a separate thread. My apologies for letting the other thread slip off topic.

It's all good. Thanks for starting the thread. Looking forward to reading the responses.

 

[Klee shay]

Good scriptural references ttg...it certainly helps us to understand where you're coming from. I still haven't made up my mind about original sin - don't know why, LOL, but I wanted to ask a question in relation to 'sin' generally; original or otherwise.

If the original sin came via Adam; then is it fair to say that sin is 'disobedience' to God rather than a list of right or wrong actions?

When I think of the word 'sin' I think of a wilful action against God's decree of righteousness toward Him and toward one another. In this light I can see how we can be born into that original sin without having lifted a finger or thinking the wrong thoughts. Simply because Adam disobeyed God in the very beginning, mankind was given the sentence of death without escape.

Is original sin different to sin in general though? Are there two different subjects here, bearing the same name of 'sin' but having different concepts? This is what confuses me I guess and why I haven't made up my mind. While I can believe we were born into the original sin by Adam's disobedience, it has changed since the resurrection of Jesus somewhat and find it hard to buy into the orignal sin debate. When we die the death of the flesh now, we are not dying at all - but rather being reborn into our new body.

Sorry if I have confused any one...still working through these issues myself. :D But thanks ttg for that scripture and opening this debate. I too am looking forward to the replies for learning's sake.

 

[JM]

Did someone say "original sin?"

Scripture:
Genesis 2:16-17 Adam's death for disobedience
Romans 5:12 That same death passes upon us
Ephesians 2:1-3 Necessary for us to be quickened who were dead
Colossians 2:13 Necessary for us to be quickened who were dead
Psalm 51:5 David a sinner from conception onward
Psalm 58:3 Wickedness from birth
John 3:5-6 New birth necessary to enter kingdom
Genesis 6:5 The thoughts of man's heart only evil continually
Genesis 8:21 The heart evil from youth
Ecclesiastes 9:3 Hearts are filled up with evil
Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all else
Mark 7:21-23 Evil acts come from a depraved heart
John 3:19 Men love darkness rather than light
Romans 8:7-8 The mind is set against God and cannot please him.
1 Corinthians 2:14 Unregenerate cannot understand spiritual things
Ephesians 4:17-19 dark understanding & hardness of heart
Ephesians 5:8 We also were once darkness
Titus 1:15 The unbelievers very minds and consciences are corrupt
John 8:44 The will of the unbeliever is to do devil's will
Ephesians 2:1-2 following the prince of the power of the air
2 Timothy 2:25-26 captured by the devil
1 John 3:10 children of the devil
1 John 5:19 world in the power of the evil one
John 8:34 everyone who sins is slave to sin
Romans 6:20 slaves to sin
Titus 3:3 slaves to sinful passions
2 Chronicles 6:36 true of entire human race
Job 15:14-16 man cannot be clean
Psalm 130:3 nobody could stand if the Lord marked iniquity
Psalm 143:2 no living man is righteous before Lord
Proverbs 20:9 none can say they made their heart clean
Ecclesiastes 7:20 not a just man on earth
Ecclesiastes 7:29 not created that way, but fell
Isaiah 53:6 all have gone astray and each has gone astray
Isaiah 64:6 even righteous deed like a polluted garment
Romans 3:9-12 all are under the power of sin
James 3:2, 6, 8 unable to bridle any passion
1 John 1:8, 10 if we say we have no sin we are self-deceived
Job 14:4 impossible to bring a clean thing out of an unclean
Jeremiah 13:23 Cannot change ourselves
Matthew 7:16-18 a bad tree cannot bear good fruit
Matthew 12:33 Must make the tree good for fruit to be acceptable
John 6:44 No one can come apart from being drawn
John 6:65 Coming must be granted by the father
Romans 11:35-36 We cannot give a gift to God
1 Corinthians 4:7 If you are different, it is because God made you that way
2 Corinthians 3:5 We are not sufficient of ourselves (this deals with Paul's call
to the ministry primarily, of course)
2 Timothy 3:7-8 never able to come to a knowledge of truth
Titus 1:12-13 Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies.
Titus 1:15-16 even their mind and conscience is defiled... reprobate
James 2:10-11 offense in one point of the law renders one guilty of the entire law
James 3:12 no fountain can bring forth both salt water and fresh.
Psalm 22:29 none can keep alive his own soul
- Compiled by Richard Bacon

I confess along with othe Reformed Baptists:

Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, And of the Punishment Thereof
1._____ Although God created man upright and perfect, and gave him a righteous law, which had been unto life had he kept it, and threatened death upon the breach thereof, yet he did not long abide in this honour; Satan using the subtlety of the serpent to subdue Eve, then by her seducing Adam, who, without any compulsion, did willfully transgress the law of their creation, and the command given unto them, in eating the forbidden fruit, which God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.
( Genesis 2:16, 17; Genesis 3:12,13; 2 Corinthians 11:3 )

2._____ Our first parents, by this sin, fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and we in them whereby death came upon all: all becoming dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body.
( Romans 3:23; Romans 5:12, etc; Titus 1:15; Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-19 )

3._____ They being the root, and by God's appointment, standing in the room and stead of all mankind, the guilt of the sin was imputed, and corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them free.
( Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21, 22, 45, 49; Psalms 51:5; Job 14:4; Ephesians 2:3; Romans 6:20 Romans 5:12; Hebrews 2:14, 15; 1 Thessalonians 1:10 )

4._____ From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.
( Romans 8:7; Colossians 1:21; James 1:14, 15; Matthew 15:19 )

5._____ The corruption of nature, during this life, doth remain in those that are regenerated; and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified, yet both itself, and the first motions thereof, are truly and properly sin.
( Romans 7:18,23; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8; Romans 7:23-25; Galatians 5:17 )

 

[Imagican]

let us also take into consideration that there was rebelion BEFORE man. Satan had ALREADY fallen from grace previous to his enticing Eve in the garden. So, wouldn't original sin have been commited 'before' man? And only original pertaining to man having preimenance ONLY concerning man 'after' his creation?

 

[ttg]

Klee Shay,

I also think of sin as willful action. It can be a sin of commission, or of omission. But original sin is a sin "contracted", not "committed". It is a state, not an act.

The real question is why are we being punished for someone else's sin?

 

[mutzrein]

Good scriptural references ttg...it certainly helps us to understand where you're coming from. I still haven't made up my mind about original sin - don't know why, LOL, but I wanted to ask a question in relation to 'sin' generally; original or otherwise.

If the original sin came via Adam; then is it fair to say that sin is 'disobedience' to God rather than a list of right or wrong actions?

When I think of the word 'sin' I think of a wilful action against God's decree of righteousness toward Him and toward one another. In this light I can see how we can be born into that original sin without having lifted a finger or thinking the wrong thoughts. Simply because Adam disobeyed God in the very beginning, mankind was given the sentence of death without escape.

Is original sin different to sin in general though? Are there two different subjects here, bearing the same name of 'sin' but having different concepts? This is what confuses me I guess and why I haven't made up my mind. While I can believe we were born into the original sin by Adam's disobedience, it has changed since the resurrection of Jesus somewhat and find it hard to buy into the orignal sin debate. When we die the death of the flesh now, we are not dying at all - but rather being reborn into our new body.

Sorry if I have confused any one...still working through these issues myself. :D But thanks ttg for that scripture and opening this debate. I too am looking forward to the replies for learning's sake.

KS - Did you read my post (can't remember where now) about the difference between the 'state of sin' resulting from Adam and an 'act of sin' as defined by a law? Perhaps I should repost here.

 

[mutzrein]

Klee Shay,

I also think of sin as willful action. It can be a sin of commission, or of omission. But original sin is a sin "contracted", not "committed". It is a state, not an act.

The real question is why are we being punished for someone else's sin?

TTG - How do you conclude that we are being punished for someone else's sin?

 

[stovebolts]

KS - Did you read my post (can't remember where now) about the difference between the 'state of sin' resulting from Adam and an 'act of sin' as defined by a law? Perhaps I should repost here.

Post it or send it to me via PM. I would be very interested in this for several reasons.

1st. We know that no sinner will enter into heaven.
2nd. We've been taught that we must accept Christ as our savior
3rd. We've been taught that we must be baptised for the remission of sins
4th. We've been taught that our names will be written in the book of life.
5th. We've been taught that we were born into sin and thus have a sinfull nature.

Problem that I find is this though.
1. I can't find where our names are actually written in the book of life. I find many many area's where a name can be blotted out of the book, but I do not, can not find ANY place where a name is actually written.
Thus, I have concluded (and I'm flexible here) that our names are already in the book of life and that we must activly choose to deny Christ for our names to be blotted out.

Love covers a multitude of Sins and I have to ponder what sins a child, especially a new born could possibly commit to have his name blotted out of the book of life. We know that it is by no authority of our own that we are saved and that it is the grace of God that saves us. So tell me, what does a sinfull infant have to do to be saved? Does one have to baptise their child and if this is the case, why are the mormons so wrong for baptising for the dead? I really see little difference here except in argument.

Now, when I look at Original Sin, I think about the first time that Eve disobeyed God and Adam followed right along. I've been told by others that we now have inherited that sin. But what I see, is when God created Adam and Eve, he gave them choice and within choice, comes desire and tendency. Tendency does not constitute sin (James 1:14-15) and although the perfect relationship was corrupted by disobedience, God wasn't willing to throw in the towel with us. If we inherited anything, we inherited the ability to be tempted, which clearly is not a sin.

So tell me, is my view on Original Sin accurate or do I have mis-understandings here and if so, show me.

Peace

 

[thessalonian]

If we inherited anything, we inherited the ability to be tempted, which clearly is not a sin.

Your theory that it is just about being able to be tempted does not hold to biblical scrutiny. The Serpant tempted Eve BEFORE the fall. She quite evidently in her perfect, natural state, without orignal sin was able to be tempted. So was Adam.

It's more than the ability to be tempted. The spirit and the flesh were in union with Adam and Eve in the garden. The sprit could control the flesh. But when sin entered the spirit was weakened and sin was able to reign. Our nature which was perfect had been corrupted. (I do not agree with total depravity, except in the sense that one who is in sin is not fit for heaven).

You children as I said before are not culpable for their sin. Yet they carry a sin nature. This can be seen in their behavior. Cute as my two year old girl is she is still many times selfish and demanding. When she does not get her own way, she is vindictive. She also many times of course is sweet. She is capable of, though not culpable for, sin.

Blessings

 

[JM]

If we inherited anything, we inherited the ability to be tempted, which clearly is not a sin.

Your theory that it is just about being able to be tempted does not hold to biblical scrutiny. The Serpant tempted Eve BEFORE the fall. She quite evidently in her perfect, natural state, without orignal sin was able to be tempted. So was Adam.

It's more than the ability to be tempted. The spirit and the flesh were in union with Adam and Eve in the garden. The sprit could control the flesh. But when sin entered the spirit was weakened and sin was able to reign. Our nature which was perfect had been corrupted. (I do not agree with total depravity, except in the sense that one who is in sin is not fit for heaven).

You children as I said before are not culpable for their sin. Yet they carry a sin nature. This can be seen in their behavior. Cute as my two year old girl is she is still many times selfish and demanding. When she does not get her own way, she is vindictive. She also many times of course is sweet. She is capable of, though not culpable for, sin.

Blessings

Hey thess,

What do you think about the Cannons of the Council of Orange 529 A.D.?

CANON 4. If anyone maintains that God awaits our will to be cleansed from sin, but does not confess that even our will to be cleansed comes to us through the infusion and working of the Holy Spirit, he resists the Holy Spirit himself who says through Solomon, "The will is prepared by the Lord" (Prov. 8:35, LXX), and the salutary word of the Apostle, "For God is at work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).

CANON 5. If anyone says that not only the increase of faith but also its beginning and the very desire for faith, by which we believe in Him who justifies the ungodly and comes to the regeneration of holy baptism -- if anyone says that this belongs to us by nature and not by a gift of grace, that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amending our will and turning it from unbelief to faith and from godlessness to godliness, it is proof that he is opposed to the teaching of the Apostles, for blessed Paul says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). And again, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8). For those who state that the faith by which we believe in God is natural make all who are separated from the Church of Christ by definition in some measure believers.

CANON 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and inspiration of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that you did not receive?" (1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10).

CANON 7. If anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life, as is expedient for us, or that we can be saved, that is, assent to the preaching of the gospel through our natural powers without the illumination and inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who makes all men gladly assent to and believe in the truth, he is led astray by a heretical spirit, and does not understand the voice of God who says in the Gospel, "For apart from me you can do nothing" (John 15:5), and the word of the Apostle, "Not that we are competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence is from God" (2 Cor. 3:5).

CANON 8. If anyone maintains that some are able to come to the grace of baptism by mercy but others through free will, which has manifestly been corrupted in all those who have been born after the transgression of the first man, it is proof that he has no place in the true faith. For he denies that the free will of all men has been weakened through the sin of the first man, or at least holds that it has been affected in such a way that they have still the ability to seek the mystery of eternal salvation by themselves without the revelation of God. The Lord himself shows how contradictory this is by declaring that no one is able to come to him "unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:44), as he also says to Peter, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 16:17), and as the Apostle says, "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:3).

 

[thessalonian]

Everything requires the grace of God. We are saved by grace alone.

Do you have a particular question?

 

[Dave...]

Steve,

1. I can't find where our names are actually written in the book of life.

You'll need to read between the lines, so to speak.

1 Timothy 1:8-9 ...of God, 9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,

Ephesians 1:4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, 5 having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will,

I find many many area's where a name can be blotted out of the book, but I do not, can not find ANY place where a name is actually written.

I see scripture that assures us that God will not blot our names out (true Christians are those who persevere, those who don't persevere were never Christians, 1 John 2:19), but I have never seen scripture that says that He will blot our names out. You are taking a positive statement and reading a negative meaning into it. Example...Revelation 3:5, think of it as a promise, not a threat.

Thus, I have concluded (and I'm flexible here) that our names are already in the book of life and that we must activly choose to deny Christ for our names to be blotted out.

Consider this...

Revelation 17:8 8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.

So tell me, what does a sinfull infant have to do to be saved? Does one have to baptise their child and if this is the case, why are the mormons so wrong for baptising for the dead? I really see little difference here except in argument.

Short answer...When was Adam and Eve guilty under the law? Answer, when they received the knowledge of good and evil as a result of their sin. God calls children innocent, not knowing their right from their left. Interesting that He said "not knowing their right from their left", meaning their lack of knowledge was the reason that they are innocent and under Grace, and must be, because we all sin from berth. I believe that this is the heart of our curse in Adam, that all people will receive the knowledge of good and evil and all that results from it. The only way around this is to die young, or be severely mentally handicapped.

So tell me, is my view on Original Sin accurate or do I have mis-understandings here and if so, show me.

See the list that Jason provided on "original sin"

Peace

 

[thessalonian]

Stove,

I find your comment that we are written in the book of life in the beginning when we are born and then erased when we sin (I think this is your position) with regard to Eternal Security, OSAS interesting. That means I guess then, we can fall from grace. Just as Paul said. I don't think the passage about being written in the book of life is a comment on our state. In context it is written to people that are already Christian as a warning, not to babies. I think it says nothing about the state of babies and whether they are written in the book of life as well. In a word - your usage of it as a defense against original sin is improper.

 

[JM]

Does anyone want to deal with the list I posted, maybe offer a different point of view on each verse?

 

[stovebolts]

Hello Thessalonian,
I hope that you will stick around this topic for a bit as we explore some ideas.

If we inherited anything, we inherited the ability to be tempted, which clearly is not a sin.

Your theory that it is just about being able to be tempted does not hold to biblical scrutiny. The Serpant tempted Eve BEFORE the fall. She quite evidently in her perfect, natural state, without orignal sin was able to be tempted. So was Adam.

Theory? Perhaps, but the nice thing about theories is that they can change as new information is gained right?
Now that I stand corrected, let me throw this past you. Can I now safely say that we were created with the ability to be tempted? If this is true, and I believe scripture supports this as does your above statement, then, logically speaking, temptation was always a part of our natural, perfect state.

It's more than the ability to be tempted. The spirit and the flesh were in union with Adam and Eve in the garden.

Union or Harmony? How are you defining Union? I believe that the harmony was disrupted by introduction to sin, but the only union that was destroyed was the Union between Man and God; keeping in mind that after the fall, God no longed walked among them.

The sprit could control the flesh. But when sin entered the spirit was weakened and sin was able to reign.

If the spirit could control the flesh, then why did it let itself become corrupted? According to James 1:14-1; sin is a manifestation of a desire that we allow ourselves to indulge in or in other words, we’ve nurtured. Both Adam and Eve had the desire to eat the forbidden fruit and each desired to be clean in Gods eyes. This is why they both gave into temptation and why each cast blame for their own actions.
To but it plainly, Sin came out of us, it didn’t enter us. At the point where we created sin, it corrupted our beingness.

Our nature which was perfect had been corrupted. (I do not agree with total depravity, except in the sense that one who is in sin is not fit for heaven).

Agreed.

You children as I said before are not culpable for their sin. Yet they carry a sin nature.

Culpable [Deserving of Blame]… Why the two different standards? Why is a child not held accountable and an adult is? This “Sin Natureâ€Â… isn’t it simply the potential to sin… and if so, Didn’t Adam and Eve receive this trait from the point of creation as well? From my understanding (and I do not boast) We are not gauged or judged on our potential to sin, we are judged (among other things) on the sins that we have committed.
Yes Yes, I know… For ALL have sinned… How are we defining all and in what context does it apply? Do the Jews sin? Yes. Do the Gentiles Sin? Yes. Does this mean we are born sinners? Well, if having the potential to sin is a sin, then Adam was created with a sin nature as well; so ultimately, God would be the on culpable. Perhaps this is why he sent his Son as the atonement? Perhaps blame is a harsher word than we should really be using… Do you agree?

This can be seen in their behavior. Cute as my two year old girl is she is still many times selfish and demanding.

Is it selfish for an infant to cry for its mother’s breast? Was it selfish for Eve to want to gain knowledge? Are we, as Christians selfish for wanting what Adam and Eve had in the Garden?

When she does not get her own way, she is vindictive. She also many times of course is sweet. She is capable of, though not culpable for, sin.

Why is she not culpable? I really want to know why you think this.

Blessings

 

[stovebolts]

Dave,
Thanks for your comments. I'll ponder what you've written.

Jeff

 

[thessalonian]

Can I now safely say that we were created with the ability to be tempted? If this is true, and I believe scripture supports this as does your above statement, then, logically speaking, temptation was always a part of our natural, perfect state.

Temptation is not incompatable with perfection. Christ was tempted in the desert. Evidently it had some appeal to him or it would not say "he was like us in all things, except sin". Temptation is not from within though so I think that is where there might be a disconnect. The garden was apparently not a perfect place, though adam and eve in it were perfect. The serpant lurked there. He was not allowed in heaven but eden was not heaven. In heaven there will be NO temptation.

Union or Harmony? How are you defining Union? I believe that the harmony was disrupted by introduction to sin, but the only union that was destroyed was the Union between Man and God; keeping in mind that after the fall, God no longed walked among them.

Harmony maybe is a better word. The point is that the spirit no longer controlled the flesh. I agree that they lost union with God.

Culpable [Deserving of Blame]… Why the two different standards? Why is a child not held accountable and an adult is? This “Sin Natureâ€Â… isn’t it simply the potential to sin… and if so, Didn’t Adam and Eve receive this trait from the point of creation as well? From my understanding (and I do not boast) We are not gauged or judged on our potential to sin, we are judged (among other things) on the sins that we have committed.
Yes Yes, I know… For ALL have sinned… How are we defining all and in what context does it apply? Do the Jews sin? Yes. Do the Gentiles Sin? Yes. Does this mean we are born sinners? Well, if having the potential to sin is a sin, then Adam was created with a sin nature as well; so ultimately, God would be the on culpable. Perhaps this is why he sent his Son as the atonement? Perhaps blame is a harsher word than we should really be using… Do you agree?

Nope, the corrupted sin nature is not simply the potential to sin. It is a weaking of what is perfectly human toward temptation leading to sin. Neither did Adam or Eve have to sin. Adam and Eve walked with God. The corruption and consequence of it is about a weakening of the human will toward sin. The alcoholic may have no will to take another drink but on his own he is incapable of sustaining that will and staying away from alcohol. His drunken state is in part due to his previous drinking which has corrupted/weakened a will that at one time had no alcohol problem. Every time we sin, we compromise our will to avoid the next instance of that and other similar sins. This weakness toward temptation is also passed on from Adam. I think it is the heart of the answer to your question about original sin. It is not sin itself but simply a weakness. It makes a fall in men immenent. Thus Paul says "all have sinned". Wheras though Adam and Eve sinned, it was not immenent. This to me I guess is the bottom line on OS.

 

[thessalonian]

Why is she not culpable? I really want to know why you think this.

Sin is about knowing that you have sinned. She is not capable of knowing she has sinned. She does not understand and reason the consequences of her actions. They simply do not know what they are doing.

Is it selfish for an infant to cry for its mother’s breast? Was it selfish for Eve to want to gain knowledge? Are we, as Christians selfish for wanting what Adam and Eve had in the Garden?

Not everything that man does is sin. Not every cry is sin. Your question seems to imply that it is. No it is not sin to cry at the mothers breast. The sin of eve was not selfishness or she would already have sinned in thought. Her sin was disobedince.

 

[Vic C.]

Does anyone want to deal with the list I posted, maybe offer a different point of view on each verse?

I'm not sure if anyone wants to be the first to pick out a few verses. How about you pick out a few you think are key to your position and briefly comment on them. I'm sure someone will follow your lead. 8-)