Biblical concept of original sin

Status
Not open for further replies.

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,649
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
[MENTION=13]Josiah[/MENTION], Jesus died because he was killed - executed - by other people.

Jesus was crucified by us (and the Jews and the Romans) because of our sins...but He died because He gave up His spirit. It was His will, not ours or the Jews or the Romans.
 

NewCreation435

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
5,045
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Jesus was crucified by us (and the Jews and the Romans) because of our sins...but He died because He gave up His spirit. It was His will, not ours or the Jews or the Romans.

Yes, it was voluntary. I don't know of anyone who would have done that for another. Get beaten half to death and then hung on a cross with a horrible crown of thorns on your head. He did that out of love
 
Last edited:

Lamb

God's Lil Lamb
Community Team
Administrator
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2015
Messages
32,649
Age
57
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Yes, it was voluntary. I don't know of anyone who would have done that for another. Get beaten half to death and then hung on a cross with a horrible crown of thorns on your head. It did that out of love

Yes, that's true. What I was trying to point out though is that He gave up His spirit...HE chose the point of His death at just the right time.
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The Catechism says

CCC 598 In her Magisterial teaching of the faith and in the witness of her saints, the Church has never forgotten that "sinners were the authors and the ministers of all the sufferings that the divine Redeemer endured." Taking into account the fact that our sins affect Christ himself, the Church does not hesitate to impute to Christians the gravest responsibility for the torments inflicted upon Jesus, a responsibility with which they have all too often burdened the Jews alone: We must regard as guilty all those who continue to relapse into their sins. Since our sins made the Lord Christ suffer the torment of the cross, those who plunge themselves into disorders and crimes crucify the Son of God anew in their hearts (for he is in them) and hold him up to contempt. And it can be seen that our crime in this case is greater in us than in the Jews. As for them, according to the witness of the Apostle, "None of the rulers of this age understood this; for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory." We, however, profess to know him. And when we deny him by our deeds, we in some way seem to lay violent hands on him. Nor did demons crucify him; it is you who have crucified him and crucify him still, when you delight in your vices and sins.

CCC 599 Jesus' violent death was not the result of chance in an unfortunate coincidence of circumstances, but is part of the mystery of God's plan, as St. Peter explains to the Jews of Jerusalem in his first sermon on Pentecost: "This Jesus [was] delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God." This Biblical language does not mean that those who handed him over were merely passive players in a scenario written in advance by God.

It would seem you and Josiah both have a point.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
It would seem you and Josiah both have a point.

Friend ImaginaryDay2. the Church makes a theological conclusion in CCC 598 and quotes a bible passage in CCC 599. But this thread is about an allegedly biblical concept of original sin so my post points to the bible passage quoted in CCC 599 rather that giving emphasis to the theological point in CCC 598. and in my earlier post (click here) I quoted the same passage that CCC 599 quotes. The fact is that Jesus died because "This same [Jesus] being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. " Acts 2:23

It is also noteworthy that the point I made was made by saying that "Holy scripture says ..." without insult and without impugning anybody's knowledge reading ability or any other personal quality while Josiah took a different route in his post (click here to see)
 
Last edited:

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
All I'm saying is that the conclusion that "Jesus died because he was executed - killed - by other people" paints half a picture. It is filled in for us by your own submission of the theological conclusions in CCC 598 that it was not merely the act of "other people" (i.e. the Jews), which appears to be opposite the point you were making. But I somehow sense I'm misunderstanding you

Your second point in the post above is noted and understood.
 
Last edited:

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Understanding what the thread is about, the conclusion that "Jesus died because he was executed - killed - by other people" paints half a picture. It is filled in for us by your own submission of the theological conclusions in CCC 598 that it was not merely the act of "other people" (i.e. the Jews), which appeared to be your point.

Your second point in the post above is duly noted and understood.
It was Romans who executed Jesus. The passage I quoted is addressed to Jews at the festival of Pentecost but the point made in it and by me is not that Jews are to blame but rather that "wicked men" killed Jesus. The theological conclusions that are drawn from Acts 2:23 and numerous other passages is not what my post addressed. The bare fact is that Jesus died because he was killed by "wicked men". The theological significance of his death is different from the fact of his death and how it was carried out.

Original sin is a theological construct that may or may not be drawn from biblical passages and careful reasoning about what those biblical passages say but it may also be a theological conclusion drawn from sources including but not limited to biblical passages. It is possible that the text of the bible does not contain any explicit passage or passages that teach a concept of original sin.

What the Church teaches about original sin draws from holy scripture and from apostolic tradition and it is from the latter as well as philosophical and theological reasoning that we - wester Christians - have inherited the doctrine of original sin.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
[MENTION=13]Josiah[/MENTION], Jesus died because he was killed - executed - by other people.
Jesus refutes your claim.
John 10:17-18
[17]“The Father loves me because I sacrifice my life so I may take it back again.
[18]No one can take my life from me. I sacrifice it voluntarily. For I have the authority to lay it down when I want to and also to take it up again. For this is what my Father has commanded.”
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
Friend ImaginaryDay2. the Church makes a theological conclusion in CCC 598 and quotes a bible passage in CCC 599. But this thread is about an allegedly biblical concept of original sin so my post points to the bible passage quoted in CCC 599 rather that giving emphasis to the theological point in CCC 598. and in my earlier post (click here) I quoted the same passage that CCC 599 quotes. The fact is that Jesus died because "This same [Jesus] being delivered up, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, you by the hands of wicked men have crucified and slain. " Acts 2:23

It is also noteworthy that the point I made was made by saying that "Holy scripture says ..." without insult and without impugning anybody's knowledge reading ability or any other personal quality while Josiah took a different route in his post (click here to see)
The Mormon church has it's own commentaries as well. It doesn't make them right. Nor does quoting commentaries from the Roman church make the Roman church right. Sola Scriptura, MC.
 

ImaginaryDay2

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 11, 2015
Messages
3,967
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Nor does quoting commentaries from the Roman church make the Roman church right.

But it does help in understanding. Btw, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a "commentary"
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
But it does help in understanding. Btw, the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not a "commentary"
Sure it is. A bunch of leaders wrote it up and made comments. The Mormon church does the same thing as does the Watchtower Society. There is nothing authoritative about the Roman church commentary and many of its traditions are not biblical.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
One concern that ought to be obvious in pursuing ideas like "we killed Christ because our sins nailed him to the cross" is that precisely that kind of thinking led to centuries of persecution against "the Jews" because they were reckoned as "Christ killers" by those who took to themselves the name "Christian". I recently watched Fiddler on the roof in which officials of the Tsarist government ordered local officials to start a pogrom against the Jews in Anatevka because they were reckoned to be "Christ killers". I am not confident that such language is either biblical nor morally defensible. We are not "Christ killers" even if your theology teaches you that your sins nailed Jesus to the cross.
 

popsthebuilder

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2015
Messages
1,850
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Original sin is and has always been the case. For those who argue against it then explain a baby because by nature they are selfish and therefore sinful. Ever seen a kid throw a temper tantrum? Saying a baby is sinless is rubbish
A kid and a new born or infant are different.

A toddler has already learned behaviors and traits from it's surroundings. A new born is not greedy or selfish nor does it desire anything but sustanance and comfort.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
ideas like "we killed Christ because our sins nailed him to the cross"


.... is exactly what our Catholic teachers and our parish priest said (pretty much every year). It's also what the Scripture says. I remember a hanging in our (very Catholic) home. It showed Christ on the Cross and said, "It was not the nails that held Him to the Cross but His love for you and me."


BACK TO THE ISSUE OF THIS THREAD......




.
 

psalms 91

Well-known member
Moderator
Valued Contributor
Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2015
Messages
15,282
Age
75
Location
Pa
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Charismatic
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
.... is exactly what our Catholic teachers and our parish priest said (pretty much every year). It's also what the Scripture says. I remember a hanging in our (very Catholic) home. It showed Christ on the Cross and said, "It was not the nails that held Him to the Cross but His love for you and me."


BACK TO THE ISSUE OF THIS THREAD......




.

Christ died for our sins and yes it was His love for us or accurately Gods love that provided the sacrifice for us but noone is to blame for Christ except for the religious leaders of the day. We all sin and all who are born after us will sin as well and it is Christ that reconciles us to God so saying that Christs love kept Him on the cross is not entirely innaccurate but saying we are to blame is definitely off the mark
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
dp
 
Last edited:

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
noone is to blame for Christ except for the religious leaders of the day.

John 12:16 The disciples did it to Him.

John 10:17, John 19:30, Luke 23:46 Jesus gave up His life, it wasn't taken from Him.

2 Corinthians 5:21, Romans 5:8 His death is the result of OUR sin, not His.


Yes, Pontius Pilate may have officially ordered the execution by being politically out manuvered by the Jewish leaders... but to give them alone responsibility (or even primary responsibility) is unbiblical and wrong. OUR sins is the reason for His death..... WE did this to Him.... and yes, WE are ultimately given life as a result.


BACK TO THE TOPIC.... See post # 5 for the Scriptures....


A blessed Holy Week to all....


- Josiah




.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2017
Messages
7,102
Age
54
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Married
A kid and a new born or infant are different.

A toddler has already learned behaviors and traits from it's surroundings. A new born is not greedy or selfish nor does it desire anything but sustanance and comfort.

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
There is no data available that agrees with your statement. However, studies have shown that babies, as early as 6 months old, manipulate parents by falsely crying when nothing is wrong. Do you care to speculate where they learned that tactic?
Pops, your assertion is false. You can assert it all you want and it will still be false.
 

MoreCoffee

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Messages
19,194
Location
Western Australia
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Catholic
Political Affiliation
Moderate
Marital Status
Single
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
A definition of Original sin as it is taught by the Catholic Church may be useful.
ORIGINAL SIN: The sin by which the first human beings disobeyed the commandment of God, choosing to follow their own will rather than God’s will. As a consequence they lost the grace of original holiness, and became subject to the law of death; sin became universally present in the world. Besides the personal sin of Adam and Eve, original sin describes the fallen state of human nature which affects every person born into the world, and from which Christ, the “new Adam,” came to redeem us.

The CCC says:
III. ORIGINAL SIN
Freedom put to the test
396 God created man in his image and established him in his friendship. A spiritual creature, man can live this friendship only in free submission to God. the prohibition against eating "of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" spells this out: "for in the day that you eat of it, you shall die."276 The "tree of the knowledge of good and evil"277 symbolically evokes the insurmountable limits that man, being a creature, must freely recognize and respect with trust. Man is dependent on his Creator, and subject to the laws of creation and to the moral norms that govern the use of freedom.

Man's first sin
397 Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God's command. This is what man's first sin consisted of.278 All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in his goodness.
398 In that sin man preferred himself to God and by that very act scorned him. He chose himself over and against God, against the requirements of his creaturely status and therefore against his own good. Created in a state of holiness, man was destined to be fully "divinized" by God in glory. Seduced by the devil, he wanted to "be like God", but "without God, before God, and not in accordance with God".279
399 Scripture portrays the tragic consequences of this first disobedience. Adam and Eve immediately lose the grace of original holiness.280 They become afraid of the God of whom they have conceived a distorted image - that of a God jealous of his prerogatives.281
400 The harmony in which they had found themselves, thanks to original justice, is now destroyed: the control of the soul's spiritual faculties over the body is shattered; the union of man and woman becomes subject to tensions, their relations henceforth marked by lust and domination.282 Harmony with creation is broken: visible creation has become alien and hostile to man.283 Because of man, creation is now subject "to its bondage to decay".284 Finally, the consequence explicitly foretold for this disobedience will come true: man will "return to the ground",285 for out of it he was taken. Death makes its entrance into human history.286
401 After that first sin, the world is virtually inundated by sin There is Cain's murder of his brother Abel and the universal corruption which follows in the wake of sin. Likewise, sin frequently manifests itself in the history of Israel, especially as infidelity to the God of the Covenant and as transgression of the Law of Moses. and even after Christ's atonement, sin raises its head in countless ways among Christians.287 Scripture and the Church's Tradition continually recall the presence and universality of sin in man's history:
What Revelation makes known to us is confirmed by our own experience. For when man looks into his own heart he finds that he is drawn towards what is wrong and sunk in many evils which cannot come from his good creator. Often refusing to acknowledge God as his source, man has also upset the relationship which should link him to his last end, and at the same time he has broken the right order that should reign within himself as well as between himself and other men and all creatures.288

The consequences of Adam's sin for humanity
402 All men are implicated in Adam's sin, as St. Paul affirms: "By one man's disobedience many (that is, all men) were made sinners": "sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned."289 The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. "Then as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man's act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men."290
403 Following St. Paul, the Church has always taught that the overwhelming misery which oppresses men and their inclination towards evil and death cannot be understood apart from their connection with Adam's sin and the fact that he has transmitted to us a sin with which we are all born afflicted, a sin which is the "death of the soul".291 Because of this certainty of faith, the Church baptizes for the remission of sins even tiny infants who have not committed personal sin.292
404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? the whole human race is in Adam "as one body of one man".293 By this "unity of the human race" all men are implicated in Adam's sin, as all are implicated in Christ's justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. and that is why original sin is called "sin" only in an analogical sense: it is a sin "contracted" and not "committed" - a state and not an act.
405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.
406 The Church's teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine's reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God's grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam's fault to bad example. the first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. the Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297

A hard battle. . .
407 The doctrine of original sin, closely connected with that of redemption by Christ, provides lucid discernment of man's situation and activity in the world. By our first parents' sin, the devil has acquired a certain domination over man, even though man remains free. Original sin entails "captivity under the power of him who thenceforth had the power of death, that is, the devil".298 Ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil gives rise to serious errors in the areas of education, politics, social action299 and morals.
408 The consequences of original sin and of all men's personal sins put the world as a whole in the sinful condition aptly described in St. John's expression, "the sin of the world".300 This expression can also refer to the negative influence exerted on people by communal situations and social structures that are the fruit of men's sins.301
409 This dramatic situation of "the whole world [which] is in the power of the evil one"302 makes man's life a battle:
The whole of man's history has been the story of dour combat with the powers of evil, stretching, so our Lord tells us, from the very dawn of history until the last day. Finding himself in the midst of the battlefield man has to struggle to do what is right, and it is at great cost to himself, and aided by God's grace, that he succeeds in achieving his own inner integrity.303

267 Cf ⇒ Jn 8:44; ⇒ Rev 12:9.
268 Lateran Council IV (1215): DS 800.
269 Cf. ⇒ 2 Pt 2:4.
270 ⇒ Gen 3:5.
271 ⇒ I Jn 3:8; ⇒ Jn 8:44.
272 St. John Damascene, Defide orth. 2, 4: PG 94, 877.
273 ⇒ Jn 8:44; cf. ⇒ Mt 4:1-11.
274 I ⇒ Jn 3:8.
275 ⇒ Rom 8:28.
276 ⇒ Gen 2:17.
277 ⇒ Gen 2:17.
278 Cf. ⇒ Gen 3:1-11 ; ⇒ Rom 5:19.
279 St. Maximus the Confessor, Ambigua: PG 91, 1156C; cf. ⇒ Gen 3:5.
280 Cf. ⇒ Rom 3:23.
281 Cf. ⇒ Gen 3:5-10.
282 Cf. ⇒ Gen 3:7-16.
283 Cf. ⇒ Gen 3:17, ⇒ 19.
284 ⇒ Rom 8:21.
285 ⇒ Gen 3:19; cf. ⇒ 2:17.
286 Cf. ⇒ Rom 5:12.
287 Cf. ⇒ Gen 4:3-15; ⇒ 6:5, ⇒ 12; ⇒ Rom 1:18-32; ⇒ I Cor 1-6; ⇒ Rev 2-3.
288 GS 13 # 1.
289 ⇒ Rom 5:12, ⇒ 19.
290 ⇒ Rom 5:18.
291 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1512.
292 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1514.
293 St. Thomas Aquinas, De malo 4, I.
294 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1511-1512
295 Cf. Council of Trent: DS 1513.
296 DS 371-372.
297 Cf. DS 1510-1516.
298 Council of Trent (1546): DS 1511; cf. ⇒ Heb 2:14.
299 Cf. John Paul II, CA 25.
300 ⇒ Jn 1:29.
301 Cf. John Paul II, RP 16.
302 I ⇒ Jn 5:19; cf. ⇒ I Pt 5:8.
303 GS 37 3 2.​
 

popsthebuilder

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 17, 2015
Messages
1,850
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There is no data available that agrees with your statement. However, studies have shown that babies, as early as 6 months old, manipulate parents by falsely crying when nothing is wrong. Do you care to speculate where they learned that tactic?
Pops, your assertion is false. You can assert it all you want and it will still be false.
What an old stale bore you propose.

Read before you speak. Seek before you claim to have found.

https://thecorrespondent.com/5889/l...the-carrots-and-the-sticks/226402605-5dbd8da4

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom