This Is How I Taught Inherited Sin Nature - The Pro-Sin Nature Position, and A Commentary Refutation

According to the majority of Christian thought, man has inherited a Sin Nature as a direct result of Adam's fall in the  Garden of Eden. Most readers of this blog understand that I am against the Inherited Sin Nature position, but perhaps most do not know that I used to hold to and teach Inherited Sin Nature during my teaching career. Most of the people who debate against my anti-ISN viewpoint assume that I do not know what the doctrine states, and attempt to educate me regarding this quite old doctrine. That being the case, I'm going to attempt  to prove that I have a handle on the issue by writing this post in defense of Inherited Sin Nature. (I have also decided to include a refutation of each point, as will be noted by comments such as these in red).

Why do men sin? According to Genesis 3, Adam and Eve were placed in the Garden of Eden, and given one command - Do not eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. No one knows how long this couple kept the command, but one day Satan in the form of a serpent enticed Eve to think about eating the fruit of the tree. She knew the command, and refused at first by saying that they weren’t to eat of it, or even touch it lest they die. No matter, Satan then said that God didn’t want the humans to eat of the tree, because they’d become gods. Thoroughly enticed now, Eve eats of the tree. Adam, who according to I Timothy 2 was not deceived by Satan, went along with Eve in eating, and thusly man fell. 

- Adam and Eve were just created by God. They did not have a "sin nature", but were enticed by fleshly desires. Eve was hungry. Adam wanted his wife. Satan used those God-given desires, and tempted man to sin. This pattern is the same today as it was in the Garden. James 1:14-15 illustrates how sin works from temptation to choice of sin to death. Nothing has changed. Further, this does not contradict Romans 5:12, as we shall see below.

God’s voice then comes walking through the Garden, and Adam and Eve hid. Once God uncovers the now sinful humans, He asks a series of questions concerning why Adam and Eve were clothed. “We saw that we were naked”, Adam said. “Who told you that you were naked? Did you eat of the tree?” Immediately Adam blames Eve. God turns to Eve, who then blames the serpent.

God then issues out a series of curses. 1. The serpent is cursed in that he must now slither and eat dust. He is also cursed in that women will hate him, and try to kill him. (There is also a prophetic statement here as well, but it is out of the scope of this article). 2. The woman has to endure greatly increased sorrow in child birth. She also is placed under the husband’s control. 3. The man is cursed in that he must eat of the fruit of the ground in sorrow all the days of his life. Work becomes hard labor. 4. All mankind will taste of physical death, and will return to dust.

- I believe that this is a key moment in the history of man. God punishes Adam and Eve for sin. The key inherited punishment here is death. Romans 5:12 reiterates this point in that Sin entered the world through Adam, because he (Adam and Eve are both called Adam in Genesis 5:2) was the first man to sin. Romans 5:12 then goes on to say that death, not sin as so many read into the verse, passed upon all men because of their sin. Sin being passed down from generation to generation is not mentioned in either Genesis or Romans. Why not? If inherited Sin Nature were part of the Fall and Curse, wouldn't it then be mentioned in Genesis 3?

Adam and Eve then had children. The first two named in the Bible are Cain and Abel. These boys had special talents, one was a shepherd, while the other was a farmer. One day they were to offer a sacrifice to God based upon His specifications. When Cain offered his sacrifice, God was not pleased. Abel’s sacrifice, however please God, which angered Cain tremendously. Hatred filled Cain to the point that he murdered Abel. This action shows a further affect of Adam and Eve’s sin – namely that sin was passed down to their children. The rest of the next 6 chapters in Genesis are filled with sin, such sin that God had to destroy man, because the imaginations of man’s heart were only evil continually (a great illustration of how sin nature had spread throughout mankind).

- It is commonly taught that because Cain did not have to be taught how to murder that this is a representation of Inherited Sin Nature. How did this sin come to pass? God gave a command. Cain transgressed that command, and it displeased God. Abel's sacrifice pleased God, which set the temptation for Cain into motion. He was tempted and acted upon that sin, hatred, which led to the next sin, murder. Before Cain acted upon the temptation, God gave Cain a choice, do well, and please God, or don't do well, and sin will be his desire and ruler. Cain chose sin. It was at Cain's choosing that sin began to rule over Cain, not at his birth. This issue was personal to Cain, and had no further influence upon mankind, except that now God had to create a new law. (More sin, more laws. Notice the pattern throughout scripture. Adam only had one Law, Moses had 430+).  

God did destroy mankind with the flood, but he spared Noah, his wife, and their three sons with their wives in the Ark. Soon after the Ark settled upon Mt. Ararat, however, that ugly sin nature revealed itself again when Canaan made Noah drunk, and looked upon his nakedness. Another curse, one upon Canaan and his descendants, is levied. Noah’s family then spreads throughout the region in accordance to God’s command to be fruitful and multiply.  But eventually, man rebels against God by congregating together in the plains of Shinar. It is there that Noah’s descendants built Babylon and the Tower of Babel. God then punishes man by confusing their language, which forces the inhabitants to spread outward from one another.

- Canaan sinned here. It was premeditated, and had to take some time, because he would have had to grow grapes from the ground up (a very time consuming process), then cultivated them properly, then harvested, and finally brewed them into the alcoholic drink. This would have taken years of growth and experimentation on Canaan's part. After he settled upon the right concoction, Canaan would have then tricked Noah, and then taken liberties with his grandfather. All of this shows premeditation and blatant action on Canaan's part. His uncles, Shem and Japheth, wanted no part of this wickedness. The curse placed upon Canaan fits with Exodus 20:5 in that God promised to punish the third and fourth generations of them that hate me. Canaan and his descendants certainly knew who God was, but chose to sin blatantly and openly against Him. Any summary study concerning the Canaanite civilizations will reveal just how wicked these descendants chose to be. This is why God commanded Israel to destroy them upon their return to the Promised Land.

Using Canaan, however, as an example of sin nature is unequivocal. Canaan's curse was for him and his descendants only. In spite of that fact, Rahab, a Canaanite from Jericho is listed in the line of Christ (Matthew 1:5). As I will note later, if inherited sin nature can be inferred from here, then Rahab's being in the line of Christ would directly imply that Christ would have inherited that very same sin nature.

These men founded societies and cultures across the planet. Their descendants became the Assyrians, Babylonians, Chinese, Incas, Aztecs, Pashtuns, Russians, Jews, Greeks, etc…. All of them had one thing in common, they were all descendants of Adam, and all cursed with a Sin Nature. This is blatantly evident in how idolatrous, murderous, pornographic, and adulterous these many civilizations became. Sin dominated mankind, but God chose to work through one of these nations, Abraham’s nation, the Hebrews (Jews), in order to bring a Savior, Jesus Christ. The remainder of the Old Testament points to the future coming Messiah, while along the way revealing how wicked man is.

- The only things they all had in common was a free will to choose whether or not to honor God, and death. As nations, they all failed. There were, however, individuals who chose to honor God. The Old Testament has examples of non-Jews who turned to God, such as Rahab, Uriah the Hittite, Ruth the Moabitess, Nebuchadnezzar, Assyria during Jonah's ministry, etc... They all had a choice, and at first chose sin. Later, they would choose God. 

Job, a man praised by God, soon reveals that he has sinned. He declares that men born of woman are a few days full of trouble (14:1). They are sinners from birth! David reiterates this point in Psalm 51:5 when he declares that he was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did his mother conceive him.  He further states that the wicked are estranged from the womb, and go astray as soon as they are born speaking lies (Psalm 58:3). All of this further illustrates how sin had passed down from Adam. Moses even weighs in with Exodus 20:5 by saying that He visits inquity upon the fathers of the third and fourth generations of them that hate me. All of this is to say that man sins from birth, because sin was passed down to them by their fathers.

- Tim and I have already covered Job 14, Psalm 51, and Psalm 58:3 but because I'm commenting on the ISN position here, let me make a few remarks.

Job 14 does not say that man is full of trouble from birth. He says that he is a few days, and full of trouble. Time is indicated here, how much time is not known, but it has to be enough time for the issues listed in Job 11-14 to be completed. A baby does not have enough days to fit that list. 

Psalm 51:5, is usually quoted alone, and well out of context, as are the other two passages. In context, Psalm 51 is a deeply sorrowful outpouring of David's sinful acknowledgement and heartfelt repentance. David is saying that he made the choice. He, and he alone, sinned against God. If he were making the claim that he sinned because he was born a sinner, then he'd have to be blaming God or his mother for making him to be a sinner. It is God who creates babies in the womb (Psalm 139:13, Jeremiah 1:5). Those babies are a gift and an heritage from the Lord (Psalm 127:3). David even goes on to say that he is fearfully and wonderfully made by God (Psalm 139:14). The weight of scripture is against David saying that God formed him in sin. Scripture clearly states that God is the one creating babies in the womb, and those babies are His fearful and wonderful creation. 

Further, if David were blaming someone or something else for his sin, then repentance would be stopped, because he'd have been making an excuse, other than his own willful choosing to sin, as to why he sinned. This is exactly what Adam and Eve did in the Garden of Eden. God did not hear their excuses, nor does he hear any man's excuses. He only hears the broken and contrite heart. David's heart was truly broken and contrite, as seen here and Psalm 38. Bottom line, it was David's fault for sin, and he acknowledged that beautifully.

Finally on Psalm 51, it is dangerous to create doctrines based upon figurative, poetic language. If this passage were entirely literal, then a cure for sin is purging with hyssop, as David asks God to do in verse 7. 

Psalm 58:3 - Once again, be careful of figurative/poetic language and context. David is only talking about the wicked in the passage, as opposed the righteous mentioned in the chapter's ending. To paint his picture, David uses figurative language throughout - poison of a serpent, deaf adder, lion's teeth, etc... Zeroing in on verse 3, David does not say that from birth the wicked are sinful. Babies don't talk (notice the figurative language), they don't have teeth, let alone lion's teeth, they're not full of snake poison. David does not want all babies to melt away and destroyed in order for him to walk in their pools of blood. The passage has even less to do with why men sin. 

Because of Adam, we need a savior. Romans 5:12 declares that we all sinned in Adam. Furthermore Romans 5:19 states that by one man we all became sinners. We are without hope, totally incapable, and lost in sins because of Adam’s choice in the Garden.

- Romans 5:12 says that sin entered the world through Adam, but Death, not Sin, passed upon all men, because all have sinned. Romans 5:19 does say that many were made sinners by one man (Adam). It says many, not all. The second half of the verse goes on to say that many were made righteous by one man (Christ). If many means all in the first part of the verse, then just a few words later in the second part, many has to also mean all. It's not the case, however, that all were made righteous by Christ. That being made righteous hinges upon man choosing Christ, which not all men have done. What is being highlighted here in Romans 5 is that man has a choice, and the greatest choice is Christ. Contextually, as a whole, this passage taught as a support for ISN could only lead to a series of unscriptural doctrines, but that's not within the scope of this article. 

Paul famously illustrates how the flesh wars against the spirit in Romans 7. He shows the saved that though they’re born again, they still have to fight that sin nature until they die, and receive their glorified bodies. He continues in Romans 8 by revealing that the Christian can either be in the Spirit or in the Flesh. Because of this, he must war against the flesh daily. This is one reason (the other two are the world and the Devil) why we need the whole armor of God as listed in Ephesians 6. We need it and Christ in order to fight against the works of the flesh listed in Galatians 5. It is against such sin/carnal/fleshly nature that we must fight in order to please God and fully enjoy the Fruit of the Spirit.

- Mike Miller wrote a series of three articles (here, here, and here) that summarize how Roman's 7 is not supporting inherited sin nature. Please, read those if you've struggled with Romans 7 and this topic. 

Briefly, however, Romans 7 fits in with Romans 1-8 as a whole dialogue. Specifically, Romans 5:12-Romans 8 are to be taken contextually together. Romans 6 talks about sin's being crucified, nailed to the cross, killed, destroyed, etc.... If this be the case, then how could a supposedly born again man be struggling with the dead corpse of sin in Romans 7, while also living a victorious, Spirit-filled Christian life in Romans 8? How could sin abide in a person's life, while Christ also abides? How can one be filled with the Spirit and sin concurrently? Or are we talking about losing salvation and regaining it over and over and over until we, hopefully, die in Christ? Where is the victory promised in Romans 7:25 and the Spirit-filled life of Romans 8? 

Bluntly, if Romans 7 is about the daily struggle of a born-again man, then Romans 8:1 is a lie. We'd all still be condemned, even in the Spirit. None of it could make any sense, unless, the traditional view of Romans 7 is incorrect. Romans 7 does teach about a struggle with sin, while under the Law, that is as an un-repentant, lost man. Paul is not saying that while he was unsaved while writing the passage. He's illustrating what his struggle was like as an unsaved, though religious person, long before he wrote the passage. Under the Law he had no victory. Under Grace his life is victorious. He, and those in Christ, are more than conquerors!

This is what Adam’s choice did for all mankind. We need a new Adam. We need Christ, without whom we’d remain dead in our trespasses and sins. We needed Him to redeem us, and declare wicked sinners righteous, even though we don’t deserve such favor. Though He did all of that, we will still have to struggle against sin for the rest of our lives, because of what Adam’s choice brought to mankind. But we will be freed from sin’s power, once we enter glory and receive our glorified bodies. Oh what a day that will be!

- We certainly do still fight a battle. We do have to fight the world, the flesh, and the devil. The world is Satan's structured system. It comprises anything and everything he can use to make a believer stumble, or keep a lost in darkness. The flesh, though not inherently wicked, is weak. It has limitations. It needs food, sleep, drink, and sex, or the human race would cease to exist. All of those desires were present in the Garden of Eden before death, or Satan would have had no way to tempt man. Those desires are God-created and God-given. Our flesh is also God-given, and he expects us to yield our members unto righteousness. 

Simply put, our bodies are tools for his service. In Christ, our bodies become His holy temples on earth (I Corinthians 6:19 and Ephesians 2:21). Essentially, we are not our bodies. Our bodies are where our soul dwells on earth, and we communicate with one another through our bodies. When our bodies cease to exist, we, our soul as Ezekiel 18:20 for example defines our being, continue, either unto life with Christ, or unto death in Hell. 

A tool can be used in any number of ways. A knife can be used to cut meat, or it can be used to kill. The knife is not evil, it had no choice in the matter. It was controlled by the user. Our bodies, likewise, can be used for good, if we choose it, or evil, if we choose it. The flesh isn't evil or good either way. The flesh can only be defined by what we make it. An adulteress has an adulteress body, because she chooses adultery, and so on and so forth. She's yielded her members to unrighteousness, and in so doing is in sin's control and bondage. 

Satan does not want us to use our bodies for Christ, and he actively uses all he can to hinder our yielding to Christ's service. We, spiritually speaking, have to put on the whole armor of God to stand against Satan. What good would protecting our flesh be, if it's our flesh that is the problem? No, the problem is from without, and what we choose to do with the problem is up to us. Choosing righteousness through Christ yields life eternal. Choosing sin brings death. It is up to you to make the decision either way. Once yielded to Christ, He promises victory, fruit, and life eternal, because He crucified sin, and the grave has lost her victory (I Corinthians 15).

(Ok, I don’t think I missed anything here. Granted it is a very brief summary, but that is how Sin Nature was taught to me in Bible College and Seminary, as well as growing up in a Christian home, attending  Christian Schools, hearing thousands of sermons, reading many tracts, witnessing to the lost, and studying the issue extensively from Augustine to Calvin to today’s theologians. It is how I taught it to my students. If I missed anything, please comment below, and let me know). 

Dialoguing with a Sinner's Prayer/Numbers Proponent

People love to boast. In America, people love to boast numbers. They love to boast sports scores, money earned, things owned, Facebook Friends, anything, if it can be counted, someone in America is boasting about their perceived numerical superiority. Sadly, this urge has poisoned Christianity as well. Pastors love to brag about their church attendances. The Hyles Anderson crowd brags that they have the world’s largest Sunday school. Others love to brag about how many were baptized on any given day, or period of time. Still others proclaim how many they had saved as a result of their work. But, this last point is starkly different than the other things mentioned in this introduction. Scores, money, attendances, baptisms, etcetera can be physically quantified and qualified for whatever they’re worth, but how does one quantify and qualify Salvation? I have had many conversations with some of America’s “leading” pastors and professed “soulwinners.” (I, at one time, even claimed to be among their ranks). The conversations, though many, generally unfolded like this:

BSW (Bragging Soul-winner): Today was an amazing day! I led 12 people to Christ. Ain’t God Good!

CC (Curious Christian): Awesome! So, how do you know they are saved?

BSW: I shared with them the Roman’s Road, and then they bowed their heads, and asked Jesus to come into their hearts.

CC: Nice, so, you spent a long time with each one then?

BSW: No, not really, only about 5-10 minutes. I had one that I spent about 30 minutes with, but that’s because she was talking so much about how she couldn’t be saved, because she was too wicked to be saved. Thank God that He is still in the soul saving business, and that salvation is the simple gift!

CC: Ok, let see if I understand you correctly. You shared the Roman’s Road. So, you began in Romans 1?

BSW: (Interrupts) No, why start in Romans 1? I started with Romans 3:23, “For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.” Then I told each one, that we’re all sinners. Then I showed them the penalty of sin, Death in Romans 6:23. Then I explained that Death is separation from God for eternity in Hell. Then I preached to them Jesus. That He was God come in the flesh, died on the cross for our sins, and that He loves us, and doesn’t want us to go to Hell when we die. I showed them Romans 5:9-10 to prove that God loved us so much that he died for us. All we have to do is Confess with our mouths, and believe in our hearts that Jesus is God, and died, was buried, and rose again for us, so that we don’t have to  go to Hell. We can, instead go to Heaven when we die.

CC: So, you did no real conviction of sin is what you’re telling me?

BSW: Sure I did. Didn’t you hear me say that I showed them Romans 3:23?

CC: Yes, you did show them that verse. But that verse is at the end of a chapter and a half of Paul’s pointing out sin. Didn’t you use the Ten Commandments?

BSW: No, why should I have?

CC: For starters, they're part of the whole Romans Road. They’re God’s standard used for judging between the sinful and righteous. Second, Jesus used them during His earthly ministry. Paul as mentioned used them in Romans 2-3, and recalled their affect upon his life in Romans 6-8. It’s not good enough to call someone a sinner. Most simply do not believe that his sin is bad enough to take his to Hell. People have to be convicted of sin. Their own, willful, wicked sin. They also have to realize how serious that sin is.

BSW: Ok, but that doesn’t change the fact that all 12 people bowed their heads and asked Jesus into their hearts. They made a profession.

CC: How do you know they're saved though?

BSW: I don’t know. We can’t see people’s hearts, only God can do that. But they confessed with their mouths that Jesus died for them. So, they're saved.

CC: Where in the Bible was the sinner’s prayer ever used?

BSW: Romans 10:9-13.

CC: Romans 10 has nothing to do with how to be saved, it has everything to do with who can be saved, namely, "Whosoever... Jew or Greek." Why didn't Christ use your method? Why not use it when the Rich Young Ruler in Matthew 19 approached him. He was already professing Christ as Good Master, like you did earlier by claiming “God is good.” What did Christ do? Did he lead him in a sinner’s prayer? 

BSW: No, but that’s because Christ could see his heart. We can’t see people's hearts.

CC: Christ proved to the ruler that he was in sin. Christ asked him a few of the Ten Commandments, which revealed pride and idolatry. Though Christ could see the heart, he showed us the way to uncover sin in man's heart/life by using this real life encounter. The ruler, though believing and even professing, left Christ lost in spite of his believing. How would you have responded, if someone like that approached you, and said the same things? Would you have lead him in the sinner's prayer?

BSW: I’m not Christ. I can’t see people’s hearts.

CC: But, we have the mind of Christ according to I Corinthians 2:15-16, and we have His example. Matthew 19 is recorded for our edification and instruction. You can know these things. One most certainly can discern between lost and saved, but not by using the sinner’s prayer. Christ gave us parables, such as the sheep and the goats, the wheat and the tares, that illustrate that the workers could see the difference between lost and saved. He also used the seed analogy to illustrate salvation. Seeds, as you know are planted, and they take time to grow. In that analogy, I’m afraid that the type of convert you’re claiming is the stony ground hearer. He immediately hears the good parts with excitement, and makes a quick decision, but becomes offended when he hears the truth about his sin over time. To use another Biblical analogy, those men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 

BSW: So, what you’re saying is that you don’t think I had 12 saved today, and that all of the great men of the faith have been witnessing incorrectly? It sounds like you’re teaching a new doctrine.

CC: You’re now appealing to human tradition as your authority. That’s dangerous. What’s equally as dangerous is that you never once mentioned repentance in your encounters.

BSW: I believe in repentance!

CC: Then why did you not reveal the specific sins in each encounter today?

BSW: I did, they need to repent of the only sin that will take man to Hell, unbelief.

CC: Granted, unbelief is a sin that will damn one to Hell, but it’s not the only one. Romans 1 lists many more sins than just unbelief. Further, many believe, but are still lost in sin. Jesus illustrated that in John 8, and specifically told the Jews that believed on Him that the truth would set them free from sin. Those believing Jews did not like that statement, and attempted to kill Christ. Christ then proclaimed that those very same believing Jews were of their father the Devil. Therefore, lost, one heartbeat from Hell! Don’t forget, also, that the Devils fear and tremble according to James 2. Belief, though necessary, is only one side of the coin. Repentance from sin is the other. True belief will trigger true repentance from sin. Though that can be, and is, immediate salvation, the results from a human perspective can only be seen over time. Much like you can plant a seed, call that seed an apple tree, but you don’t truly know if the tree that grows from that seed is an apple tree until you see the fruit.

BSW: But the church saw 3,000 saved on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2!

CC: Certainly, but it was the Holy Spirit that proclaimed those numbers, not man. Those 3,000 were also commanded to repent, and in fact did repent after sin was clearly revealed to them by Peter's message. Nowhere else does any man boast of such numbers. In fact, as an example, Paul was very cautious about even baptizing (that is, only those who were professing salvation) many people in I Corinthians. We should adopt the same approach, and be cautious when witnessing. He instead stated that he was called to preach the Gospel. We’re all called to do the very same thing. The proclaiming of someone’s salvation, however, was not given to us. We do a disservice by inoculating people against the real truth, that Christ died to free us from sin, when we witness improperly.

BSW: You think all of the reported numbers are unsaved.

CC: Using such methods, being unbiblical at their heart, cannot lead someone to Christ. In fact, praying a sinner's prayer does not allow for true repentance. The person praying is now implicitly relying upon the fact that he prayed a prayer to get into Heaven. He, therefore, and often does, continue living in his life of sin, never turning from sin ever. Why should he? You never warned him about it. For instance, how many of those thousands evidenced a changed life, one that sees those large numbers hungering and thirsting after the things of God. How many of those numbers want to fellowship with the believers? How many of those numbers want to preach to the Lost the same way that Christ did?

BSW: But they are baby Christians. They can’t all want that at first. They must be discipled. There must be follow up.

CC: Yes and no. Yes, they’re baby Christians. Yes, they need to be discipled. No, they are in fact all called to go and preach the Gospel. That’s commanded to everyone. Christ had no problem sending His new children immediately back into the harvest. Paul had no problem doing the same thing. Philip had no problem doing it either. No, there needs to be no follow up with soundly saved people. If they’re soundly saved, they will crave the things and people of God in such a way that they will continuously be seeking those things. Why should anyone have to compel a saved person to want to know more about God, to want to spend time with others who want to know more about God, to tell the lost and dying about the Love of Christ? That love and desire can’t be hidden. Jeremiah’s comments about this issue in Jeremiah 20 reveal the very need that a truly saved person has to share the Gospel. Paul expounds upon that victorious freedom and power in Romans 8. The Bible further reveals nothing about this “follow up” as you call it. Instead, it talks about those going out from us, but not being of us.

BSW: What you’re talking about is saying that very few can be saved.

CC: Yes! Christ stated as much too! Matthew 7. Which about sums up everything we’ve discussed. You’re trying to claim numbers by using an unbiblical method, the sinner’s prayer. In turn you’re creating false converts, who do not want to know Christ, serve Christ, fellowship with believers, or repent from sin. This passage should, therefore, frighten you! You need to repent from this wicked practice, as it’s not helping anyone, it’s sending many to Hell, “in the name of Christ.”  

14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?

17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.

18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.

20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.

21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

If one professing to be a follower of Christ does not repent of this practice, then he should beware of Christ’s woe upon his life in Matthew 23:15 - Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves. I appreciate your zeal, but please, practice your zeal with humility and sound doctrine!

*Nota Bene! I realize that this dialogue is filled with red herrings, especially from the BSW position, but that, generally speaking, is exactly how these conversations unfold. Once the BSW position is questioned, and the BSW's objections are answered, he can only steer away from the main point at hand. He thinks he has answers, but none of them are tenable, which is why I purposely take on his red herring objections. Typically, though not in this dialogue, these conversations do not remain calm. Most of the interactions that I have had like this end with the BSW screaming, creating straw men, and/or yelling ad hominem attacks at me. In other words, they simply, and profoundly, have no viable, scriptural response, and thus reveal wickedness.

Augustine - Saint or Sinner?

I have stumbled across an interesting summary regarding "Saint" Augustine, that I believe is well worth the short amount of time necessary to read the article. It can be found here.

Of special note in the article is the history detailing how Augustine, and his friend Jerome, used force to have Pelagius declared a heretic. Ever since that time, Pelagius and his adherents have been deemed heretics by, not only Augustine's Catholic Church, but also those within the Reformed Catholic (aka. Protestant) traditions. This piqued my interest, as I have always read about the "Pelagian Heresy" in most books covering the topic. No one mentions how Pelagius was proclaimed orthodox many times by the very same leaders who, later, were coerced into declaring Pelagius a heretic. Why was Augustine so bent on having Pelagius declared a heretic? Could it have been because under Pelagius' view, Augustine was still guilty for his sins?

Church - The Reality

The Reality

In his book, The Naked Church (available here), Wayne Jacobsen compares the institutional church to the emperor in Hans Christian Andersen’s The Emperor’s New Clothes. For those who aren’t familiar with the story, the emperor had an obsession with new clothes. “He did not trouble himself in the least about his soldiers; nor did he care to go either to the theatre or the chase, except for the opportunities then afforded him for displaying his new clothes.” Two strangers approached the emperor and promised to make some special clothes for him. As the story goes, these strangers pretended to weave the finest clothes for the emperor while they actually did nothing at all. The emperor sent two of his faithful men to check on the work. The faithful men (a minister and an officer both who were honest and capable) saw nothing being made, but were persuaded by these strangers that there was something beautiful in the weaver’s loom. The emperor then went himself to check on the clothes, and he too was persuaded by these strangers. A processional was then planned for the whole kingdom, who at this point were eager themselves, to see the emperor’s new clothes. Out he paraded and the whole kingdom followed suit to the emperor and his faithful men. “Oh! How beautiful are our Emperor’s new clothes!” they all exclaimed. All that is, except for a little child who said “But the Emperor has nothing at all on!” The father of the child tried to excuse his remark as mere innocence, but eventually all the people agreed with the child’s assessment. “The Emperor was vexed, for he knew that the people were right; but he thought the procession must go on now! And the lords of the bedchamber took greater pains than ever, to appear holding up a train, although, in reality, there was no train to hold.”

Jacobsen takes a slightly different approach to using this story to make a point. I like to see this simple story as a clear picture of the condition of the institutional church. Throughout this post, and others, I will refer to the institutional church by “church.” A distinction will be made by using “Church” with a capital “C” to discuss those who are born-again believers. The Emperor in this story can be likened unto the church. It has an obsession with external beauty. The minister and the officer can illustrate the leaders in the church who are confronted with the problems, but end up holding their peace lest they bring shame to themselves and the church. The people in the story are much like the congregation of a church who proclaim how great the church is, while it is clearly lacking. The little child can be likened unto the one who is willing to stand up and state the obvious. As Jacobsen says, he has no “personal stake in the deception. He was too young to understand the necessity of denying reality to save face.” He saw things as they really are and made a simple comment which changed the way the rest of the kingdom perceived their emperor.

I hope in the next few posts, my simple comments will encourage readers not toward bitterness, but toward a desire to change and see change within Christianity. It is much easier to sit back with everyone else and proclaim “How beautiful is the church!” but reality is contrary to this idea.

The reality is that the church is not doing what it was intended to do. Instead of preaching repentance and belief in Christ as the means for salvation, the church has persuaded men that as long as you pray the fire insurance prayer you will be saved from hell. Political speeches have replaced Bible study. Evidence of the lack of Bible study can be seen when some members of the church want to get together outside of the regular church services to study the Bible. This is often done under the guise of studying something to help a specific group (ladies, men, singles, youth, young married couples, etc.). This desire is not wrong in and of itself. It is however, evidence that something is lacking. If the church were gathering together to study God’s word properly, there would hardly be a need for these extra meetings. Instead of proving all things, the church blindly accepts the teachings and doctrines of their church and pastor. Instead of encouraging believers to follow their unique path in Christ, the church is guilt-tripped into following the direction of their church or pastor.

The reality is that sin is rampant in the world, but more importantly within the church. A wicked lifestyle is often excused as a state of backsliding. False assurances are given to those that, although wicked, are saved so as by fire. Sin is dismissed as being an outworking of a fallen, sinful nature. Meanwhile, faithful church attendees are given a false sense of security that as long as they are faithful on Sundays and Wednesdays and give their tithes and offerings, that they are on the right path. The Bible is now used as nothing more than a tool to support our own philosophical ideas rather than develop our ideas – a practice called proof-texting. Leaders are proclaimed as kings and approached as priests.

The reality is that MANY are being deceived by the devil’s ministers of righteousness. MANY will end up in hell one day and will say, “Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works?” Despite the feelings of most church-goers, this verse has greater application to those within their circles than they can even imagine.

The reality is that instead of being the Church of Jesus Christ every day of the week, people are content to “go to church” once or twice a week.

Listen to the voice of my simple words found in the following posts. I have no personal agenda or interest to further my name and ruin anyone else’s. My desire is to promote the Lord Jesus Christ and Him alone! I understand the face of many will be against me as I try to root out, pull down, destroy, and throw down. Once this can be accomplished, then building and planting can commence. Like Jeremiah, we are to realize that the Lord is with us and will make us as an iron pillar!

Sin Nature - Part 10: Why Any Person Should Know that Original Sin Isn't True by Mike Miller

There are some things that are just basic and MUST be true. When it comes to God one of the most basic truths has to be the justice of God. He is righteous, He is fair, He does all things right – He is just. He doesn’t mistreat anyone and He is no respecter of persons. That means that He will never wobble in judgment because of who it is that is in trouble. The Bible plainly calls that a SIN and says God doesn’t do that. (Rom 2:11; James 2:9) If this basic attribute of God is undermined, then we simply cannot trust him. No one can truly trust a God who is not completely and consistently just. If He doesn’t absolutely do what is right ALL the time then we just cannot completely trust him, and that is the very basic thing we must do in order to be saved – trust God.

The idea of justice is basic to our nature. Almost every story ever told, or every movie ever made, has as its basic theme good versus evil. There are always two forces pulling against each other – right and wrong. The suspense is always basically about how the story will end. Will it end “right” or will wrong prevail? No one wants the bad guys to win. Any story or movie that would end with the bad guys winning and the good guys getting defeated would be contrary to our nature and no one would like it – that’s why no one writes stories or makes movies like that. Even bad people root for the good guys to win, and are troubled when it looks like they will lose. That is because God so constituted us that we want justice to be done. The only part of our nature that will override that desire for justice is plain old selfishness. People will mistreat others and be unjust in order to get their own way or obtain what they want. But even when they do that they must rationalize until they justify it (make it just or right) some way in their minds so they can live with themselves. That is further proof that God has instilled in us a great sense of justice, and because of that we know that God MUST be just.

So we come to what is the greatest problem with the doctrine of original sin. Not only is it unscriptural and illogical, but it is plainly unjust, and it necessarily makes God unjust. Every person’s conscience cries out that it is wrong to blame someone for the wrongdoing of another, and even more so when they had no knowledge of the act, gave no consent, and didn’t even exist when the act was committed! If an infant is judged guilty before he is born because of what Adam did 6000 years ago then God is not just. That is just not right and every person on earth knows it! Even those who believe the doctrine of original sin concede that it can’t be reconciled with the justice of God.

For this reason it has been the stumblingblock to many of the famous skeptics and enemies of the Gospel through the years. Any reasonable, thinking person who insists on truth just can’t reconcile this illogical, unscriptural doctrine with the fact that God must be just. It is not necessary to throw out reason and common sense when it comes to understanding and explaining the Gospel. It is ridiculous for anyone to belittle or condemn reason and logic when it comes to understanding God. We were created by God and given the ability to reason and think. It is a part of everything else in our life and to insist that you have to lay it aside when it comes to God is an abominable idea. Certainly, there are things about God that we cannot understand this side of heaven, but not when it comes to understanding the plan of salvation! Not when it comes to God’s basic character! Not when people insist on a doctrine that totally contradicts the righteous character of God! How many souls has the doctrine of original sin damned for eternity? How different might it have been if this doctrine had never been introduced into the church and become so widely accepted!

The doctrine of original sin necessarily teaches that babies who die go to hell forever. Augustine, who introduced this doctrine into the Catholic Church in the fifth century A.D., plainly stated that babies who died without being baptized by the church were condemned to hell. The Catholic Church teaches that baptism is the new birth and the water washes away sins. This is the reason for the persecution against the Anabaptists, which was a general term referring to those who didn’t baptize babies. Because of their firm belief in original sin the Catholics thought it a terrible crime not to baptize babies, because if they died without baptism they went to hell. Many good and faithful believers were burnt at the stake or otherwise tortured and killed by the Roman Church because of this doctrine of devils.

Over the years this doctrine has crept into other denominations and become the foundation for all their beliefs. The doctrine of original sin has served the cause of ecumenicalism far better than anything else Rome has ever come up with. The way it was transferred from the Roman Church to the rest of Christianity is through Calvinism. Calvin simply took the teachings of Augustine, starting with original sin, and began his own brand of Christianity. Through the years it has evolved into a watered down version that is palatable for most undiscerning Christians. But a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump, and the gospel has become a mass of confusing contradictions that has no power to save or to sanctify.

The Catholics, the Calvinists, and most of the rest of Christianity, including the cults, all agree on original sin. When you really begin to dig and study this matter, one of the first things that becomes apparent is that the Roman Catholics are more consistent than the rest of Christianity when it comes to original sin. Over the years they have realized the obvious inconsistencies and the fact that they are not reconcilable. So they come up with new doctrines to try to make the whole thing reasonable and workable. Not the so-called Bible-believers! I have never met one of them who believed babies go to hell when they die. They know God is just and that it is unjust to send an innocent baby to hell. Yet they will defend the fact that babies are born sinners with all the fire and brimstone they can muster. What a contradiction! They say, “Well, they haven’t reached the age of accountability!” But when asked for Scripture to prove that, they are totally empty-handed. There is no Scripture to prove that certain sinners will go to heaven because they were unaccountable. The only way given in the Bible for a sinner to make heaven his home is to repent of his sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Sin is not imputed where there is no law. Babies are simply not sinners because they have no knowledge of good and evil. The Bible teaches that they “become” sinners when they “turn aside” and “go astray.” Sin is a deliberate act of the will against the known law of God – not some hidden gene you are born with! Adam’s sin is not recorded in our DNA! If it is then it is only a matter of time until scientists figure out where it is and they can cure it – without the blood of Christ. Salvation is a matter of the heart (soul) of man and not of the body. Jesus doesn’t do anything to your physical body when you get saved – it is your heart He makes new!

Those who believe in the doctrine of original sin are therefore very unconvincing to any lost sinner who thinks. In his mind, he knows God must be just, but this Christian, who is trying to win him to the Lord, teaches a doctrine that denies the justice of God. Therefore, the would-be soul-winner puts a giant stumblingblock in front of the sinner. He must trust God, but God is not always just. He will not always do what is right. He sometimes blames people for things they didn’t do. He creates innocent babies and then puts them in hell because of the sin of Adam.

If you have embraced the doctrine of original sin you certainly have your work cut out for you. Obviously, because of the deceitfulness of sin, there are many that will believe this nonsense, but thankfully, there are some who won’t, and I am one of them. It is amazing how the Word of God becomes so rich and real when you lay aside this confusing, deceitful doctrine! The Atonement and what God has done for us through Christ becomes so much more understandable and wonderful! This doctrine is like blinders that keep you from seeing. Take it off and throw it away and you will be amazed at what you can see!

My sin was MY own doing, and my own fault! It was MY HEART that was set against God because of my own sin that I loved. But God loved me while I was yet in such a state and gave his Son for me! He will forgive me if I simply trust Him and I CAN do that because He is a righteous (just) and holy God! Salvation is real and the world needs to hear that way!

Sin Nature - How Does Original Sin Affect Other Important Bible Doctrines? - Part 8 by Mike MIller

As we have previously pointed out, the doctrine of original sin contradicts, confuses, and makes a mess out of all other true Bible doctrines. It is totally out of character with the rest of what the Bible teaches about sin, salvation, depravity, guilt, mercy, and judgment. It is impossible to reconcile the doctrine of original sin with the major doctrines of Bible believing Christianity.

As another example let’s look at the doctrine of regeneration. The term means to renew. It refers to the new birth, which is a spiritual birth. Just about any dictionary or commentary will agree with that definition of regeneration. It is that change that happens at salvation in which the will and the enmity of man toward God and his law are subdued, and in it’s place a supreme love for God and his law is shed abroad in his heart. He has been born again or regenerated. He is a NEW CREATURE IN CHRIST.
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 2 Cor. 5:17
For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. Gal. 6:15
Those who believe the doctrine of original sin run into problems trying to understand and teach the Bible doctrine of regeneration. Since they believe that moral depravity is part of your physical constitution it follows that a physical change must take place in regeneration. I have heard some of them refer to regeneration as being literally “re-gened,” or in other words being made new – physically. They are completely outside of the Scriptures with this idea because there is no such thing even hinted at in the Bible. Sin is always referred to as a matter of the soul, or the heart of man. The new birth is a spiritual birth – not another physical birth. It is circumcision of the heart – not of the flesh.

If our very nature is sinful, and that from birth, then is naturally impossible for us to repent and believe the Gospel. According to those who believe in original sin, God must regenerate us BEFORE we can repent. Therefore, the sinner is totally passive and God does everything. Here’s how it works: God chooses someone He wants, regenerates them, and then they repent and believe the Gospel. They are totally passive and just a very lucky person because God happened to choose them.

Because they believe that sin has as its cause your physical body, they reason that God must do something to the physical body when we are regenerated. For this reason we see people coming up with doctrines like “eradication of the sinful nature,” or “sinless perfection.” We are often falsely accused of believing these doctrines. Every time I hear that accusation I have to laugh, because our critics who believe in original sin are the ones who are obliged to believe these doctrines. They are the ones who believe that regeneration is a physical thing God does to you. These are just a couple of the misunderstandings that naturally follow and spring forth from the idea of original sin.

When a person gets saved and suddenly realizes that they are still tempted to sin they run to these spiritual leaders who believe in original sin for help. They are told that they have a sinful nature and will have it until they die because this sinful body is the problem. But the new convert is confused because they were told by these same people before they were saved that the sinful nature is what condemned them to hell. It wasn’t the sins of the flesh, but that wicked nature they were born with that needed salvation. Now they are saved, but still have this sinful nature! Not only that, but they need not expect to be free from sin. Everyone sins every day in “word, thought, and deed.” What kind of salvation is that? What IS salvation if after we are saved we still have the thing for which we were condemned?

So they have a real dilemma on their hands. From here spring forth all kinds of false teachings and doctrines intended to explain this difficulty while holding fast to the doctrine of original sin. They couldn’t dare question the foundation! In their minds original sin is the basic truth of the Bible, and to it is totally unacceptable to question it at all. Everything else MUST be made to conform to the doctrine of original sin! It HAS to! They can’t give up their basic, fundamental doctrine!

So they explain it this way: after we are saved we are really two separate people – the old man, and the new man. The old man is wicked and sinful, while the new man CANNOT sin. Life is a constant battle and there is never any peace because that old man just won’t die. What happened at salvation was that a new man was born, but now must share the same body with the wicked “old man.” This “old man” seems to be much more wicked than the person was before they got saved. He can’t ever do right, but that same person before they were saved did do right once in a while. They were selfish and sinful, but not nearly as bad as this mysterious “old man” that now runs the show. The new man is weak and sickly and unable to take control away from the “old man.” Bless his heart, the new man WANTS to, but he just CAN’T. He is trapped in a body that is out of his control and he must simply bide his time until the creature dies. Then, and only then, will he be truly set free. DEATH is really his only true saviour. DEATH is the only thing that can deliver him from his bondage of sin. God created this new man but He just wasn’t able to make him stronger than the “old man.”

Isn’t that a wonderful picture of salvation? How many sinners would jump at the chance for a new life like that?

Isn’t original sin a wicked doctrine? It makes salvation so empty and meaningless. It is such an insult to what Jesus really did do for us. It makes being saved so unappealing that it is a wonder that anyone ever gets saved. Instead of peace and victory it offers only struggle and defeat. Instead of true deliverance from bondage it leaves you in a worse state than you were before!

The true Bible teaching on this matter is that the old man is DEAD. He has been BURIED. And the new man has risen with Christ and …
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Gal. 2:20
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. Rom. 6:6
Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; Col. 3:9
Thanks be to God, the old man is dead!

So the proponents of original sin run into a problem with the Bible every time they try to explain the inconsistencies and contradictions with the other major doctrines of the Bible. Maybe that is why the new Pope said in 1985:
"The inability to understand 'original sin' and to make it understandable is really one of the most difficult problems of present-day theology and pastoral ministry."
This is from the man who was the guardian of doctrine for the Catholic Church for years under Pope John Paul II, and is now the Pope himself. He admits that it is impossible to understand or explain. But still, it is the basis for all other doctrine concerning sin and salvation – for Catholics and most Protestant denominations. And multitudes of souls continue to be deceived and die in their sins because they are taught by the religious leaders that there really is no victory in this life.

No wonder Jesus said, “When the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” – Luke 18:8

Next part: Spiritual Death?

Sin Nature - Job 14:4

Job 14:1-4

1 Man that is born of a woman is of few days and full of trouble.

2 He cometh forth like a flower, and is cut down: he fleeth also as a shadow, and continueth not.

3 And doth thou open thine eyes upon such an one, and bringest me into judgment with thee?

4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.

Studying God’s word brings great peace. It is God’s way of revealing Himself to us. He withholds Himself from those who look at His word as another book and shows Himself to those who sincerely search the Scriptures with an open heart. God will reveal Himself to the person who takes his time reading and meditating upon His word especially in this topic of whether or not man has a sin nature. I am saddened when I speak out about what God’s word says on the issue, and I see people hardened to the truth of the Scriptures. What saddens me even more is to know of those who proclaim a sin nature when it benefits them and then claim that everyone has a choice to sin or not to sin. Recently I simply questioned the teaching that sin is passed to all by birth in an institutionalized “church.” Very quickly the response turned sour and I was accused of teaching some “dangerous doctrines.” It was at this very point that I realized the truth. When we speak the truth, we will often be misrepresented, labeled as a heretic, and accused of teaching outrageous things. In the past few months, I have gone through all of the above. I have spoken to several people who are given biblical support to continue believing in an inherited sin nature. Sadly, most of these people have some known sin that they are unwilling to lay aside and are simply looking for some excuse to continue in the same. For those who continue to insist that man inherited a sin nature from Adam, Job 14:4 “shuts the door” on the subject.

All one has to do to understand this passage is to read the book of Job from chapter 11-14 in its context. Unfortunately this is not done, because man runs to the Bible to only get support for his beliefs rather than going to God’s word to teach him what he should believe. Our world has taken on a sort of “fast-food” mentality where they want everything quick and at their fingertips. You can see this all over. The internet is a great example of the mentality. When the internet first came on the scene in the 90s, it was dial-up. Then came cable modems, and DSL, and now everyone has the internet at the palm of their hand by means of a cell phone. Although this is a luxury that I do take advantage of, it is sad to see this mentality of having things quick take hold of “Christianity.” People want an answer, and they want it now. When one has this mentality with sin nature, the end result will more than likely result in the belief that man has a sin nature. Instead of taking the time to read verses in their context and compare scripture with scripture to ensure that there is further support instead of contradictions, many will run to the Bible to attach a verse to their belief as if it was some confirmation of what they already believe or have been taught for generations.

Job 14:4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.

In Job 11, Zophar the Naamathite is busy trying to find the answers as to why Job had experienced such great loss and pain in his life. Like a typical Pharisee of today, he suggests that there must be some iniquity that Job has within his heart (“Know therefore that God exacteth of thee less than thine iniquity deserveth.” 11:6) Zophar had no concept that it could be the devil at work as an adversary seeking to devour Job (just like the devil is at work seeking to devour all those whom he equips with an excuse for their sin – sin nature). Before knocking Zophar too much, keep in mind that the purpose of Job’s suffering is recorded for us in the first 2 chapters. Zophar was not privy to the conversation God had with Satan. God had testified of Job that he was a perfect and upright man who eschewed evil. Satan had, therefore, gained permission to afflict Job with the intention of showing God that Job served only because of his temporal blessings. Job responded in a way that showed how much his heart was set on God – “Blessed be the name of the Lord.”

In chapter 11, Zophar prescribes a method for Job to get right with God and to get out of the mess that Job was in. He says,

13 If thou prepare thine heart, and stretch out thine hands toward him;

14 If iniquity be in thine hand, put it far away, and let not wickedness dwell in thy tabernacles.

Then the result, he says, will be:

15 For then shalt thou lift up thy face without spot; yea, thou shalt be stedfast, and shalt not fear:

16 Because thou shalt forget thy misery, and remember it as waters that pass away:

17 And thine age shall be clearer than the noonday: thou shalt shine forth, thou shalt be as the morning.

18 And thou shalt be secure, because there is hope; yea, thou shalt dig about thee, and thou shalt take thy rest in safety.

19 Also thou shalt lie down, and none shall make thee afraid; yea, many shall make suit unto thee.

Chapters 12-14 records the response that Job had to Zophar, and it is not a response of one who is submitting to the preaching he had just heard. Listen to Job’s language:

Job 12

1 And Job answered and said,

2 No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you.

3 But I have understanding as well as you; I am not inferior to you: yea, who knoweth not such things as these?

4 I am as one mocked of his neighbour, who calleth upon God, and he answereth him: the just upright man is laughed to scorn.

5 He that is ready to slip with his feet is as a lamp despised in the thought of him that is at ease.

6 The tabernacles of robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are secure; into whose hand God bringeth abundantly.

7 But ask now the beasts, and they shall teach thee; and the fowls of the air, and they shall tell thee:

8 Or speak to the earth, and it shall teach thee: and the fishes of the sea shall declare unto thee.

9 Who knoweth not in all these that the hand of the Lord hath wrought this?

10 In whose hand is the soul of every living thing, and the breath of all mankind.

11 Doth not the ear try words? and the mouth taste his meat?

12 With the ancient is wisdom; and in length of days understanding.

13 With him is wisdom and strength, he hath counsel and understanding.

In chapter 13, Job calls his friends (Zophar included) “forgers of lies,” “physicians of no value.” He asks, “Will ye speak wickedly for God? And talk deceitfully for him?” He tells them to “Hold your peace, let me alone, that I may speak, and let come on me what will.” One of the greatest verses on trusting God is found in the middle where Job says, “Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him: but I will maintain mine own ways before him.” The whole chapter, Job is answering his accusers. The difference between Job and his accusers was that Job saw what really mattered – keeping his heart right with God. His accusers, on the other hand, thought that rest, security, and prosperity were marks of a blessed life.
His response is continued in chapter 14 where he asks several more questions to his friends and makes some powerful statements. “Man that is born of a woman is of few days and full of trouble.” Trouble is not the equivalent to sin. Job was not filled internally with trouble, rather he was born into a world that was filled with trouble – just like all mankind has been since the fall of Adam and Eve. In 2 Corinthians 7:5 Paul tells the Corinthians that he was “troubled on every side.” Trouble is present in the world as told by Christ in John 16:33, but it is not implanted in the heart, flesh, spirit, life of every newborn child. He is born into and unto a world full of trouble. We can take great comfort knowing that the Lord will deliver us out of all trouble – Psalm 54:7!
Verse 4 is where all the complications start. Job asks, “Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one.” Instead of surmising that he is providing a doctrinal statement for all churches that would ever be established, remember the context. Job asks his friends, which included Zophar, if they can bring cleanness out of Job who were themselves unclean. Before you say, “Aha! I got you in a corner! You confessed that Job’s friends were unclean!” Job did not say they were unclean by birth but by the fact that they were liars, physicians of no value; while he attested to the fact that he was just and upright (Job 12:4 – which was validated by the Lord’s testimony of him in Job 1). Job here was asking a rhetorical question with the purpose of getting his “friends” to realize that he was just and upright before God and they were unclean before God.
For fun, let’s pretend this verse was all by itself in Job 14. Let’s make believe for just one moment that we can take this verse out of context and use it to teach that all babies around the globe and since the Garden of Eden were born unclean – with a sin nature. Since all have sinned and are thereby unclean by their sin, all that are born inherit the uncleanness (sin) from their parents. My question would be, then, what about the Christian and those born of a Christian? Christians are clean as attested to by many verses in God’s word. The following are just a few examples:
John 13:10 – Jesus saith to him, He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit: and ye are clean, but not all.
John 15:3 – Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you.
I John 1:7 - But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
I Corinthians 6:11 – And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
A Christian has been cleansed through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. One can not claim the Christian is unclean. If Job 14:4 were to be teaching that an unclean person can only give birth to an unclean person (a sinner can only give birth to a sinner), then a person can rightfully deduce that a Christian (who is clean) can give birth to a Christian (another clean person). This is not my belief, and probably not the belief of a majority of those who are pushing sin nature. However, if you hold to the fact that sin is passed by conception, birth, intercourse, blood, etc. then you must also hold to the belief that a Christian is not clean. As horrible as it sounds, most do believe that Christians are not clean! They like to quote the phrase, “I’m just a sinner saved by grace!” Although it sounds pious and doctrinally sound, you can not find one reference in the Bible which describes a Christian as being a sinner. No doubt he can and will sin against God as he is still in a world of sin and oft tempted by the devil, but a Christian is a new creature. The passage in I Corinthians 6 calls a Christian a saint. Then for illustration sake, Paul describes the unrighteous: fornicators, idolaters, adulterers, effeminate, abusers of themselves with mankind, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners. He plainly says that none of these sinners shall have part in the kingdom of God (righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost – what we call salvation). “And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.” The blood of Christ cleanses us from all sin!
After the above paragraph, I am often met with the response, “Well I guess you are perfect, then. And your children are perfect too!” This technique, known as the Delphi technique, is used by opponents to make it seem like I am completely out of sorts with reality, leaving any who are listening to conclude that the belief in a sin nature is the only logical explanation. I do not believe I am perfect, nor that I have attained anything other than forgiveness and a new life through Christ. This new life has new desires and has seen the old man crucified and old desires pass away. This new man is not at war with the old man, because the old man is dead! I can’t forget that Christ has exhorted me to be perfect and to strive for the mastery. Along the way, my lusts may conceive and bring forth sin, but to be controlled by sin is not what Christianity is about! Christ has saved me from my sins. That is he saved me from the sins I have committed and has saved me from the power of sin. I used to teach that Christ has saved me from the sins I will commit. No doubt, Christ will forgive us from any sin that we confess and forsake (including those committed in the future), but such an attitude should not be present in a Christian’s heart (the attitude that we will sin). Instead we should live freely knowing that He has saved us from the power of sin NOW!
Is it such a terrible thing to preach that a person can overcome sin in this life?! Do I really have to be labeled a heretic by believing in such a thing?! I expect to be called a heretic by the world, but the world tends to understand more about salvation than those found warming the pews listening to some hireling offer an excuse for his and his listeners’ sin. An unsaved person understands the cost of salvation. He understands that to be Christ’s means to no longer live fulfilling the lusts of his flesh. I would like to believe that I John 4:4 and 5:4 speak of a Christian being able to overcome the sin and trouble that is in the world through the power of Jesus Christ! I would like to believe that I can have victory now! It has been my experience that whenever you use these verses to show that a Christian can live in victory and overcome sin, that those who disagree cut these verses out of the Bible and paste them to a time in the future! Although the times of the Old Testament, Tribulation, Millennium, etc. did and will have some unique differences, one thing has not changed throughout time: the ability of believers to overcome sin (Thy word have I hid in my heart that I might not sin against thee.)!
It can also be said of you that you DO NOT believe that the blood of Christ has cleansed you from all sin. You DO NOT believe that the words of Christ to His apostles, “Now ye are clean” applies to you! I would much rather believe what the Bible says on the issue. Sin is a choice that each individual makes. It happens when the devil tempts your God-given will to break God’s Law. Hopefully you will see that instead of believing that Job was claiming that all people that are born are unclean! 

Are We Born Sinners? - Part 7: How Does Original Sin Affect Other Important Bible Doctrines? by Mike Miller

I have always been shocked at the extreme reactions when people hear the doctrine of original sin questioned for the first time in their lives. Many even get rather violent in their defense of this tenant of the Catholic Church. You would think that to deny original sin was to deny one of the fundamentals of the faith.

I have also noticed that any doctrine that promotes the helplessness of sinners and makes excuses and explanations for their sin is very gently accepted with open hearts and minds. It doesn’t matter if it blatantly contradicts well-known Scriptures; there is no violent reaction and generally no resistance to such teachings. Doesn’t that seem a little strange?

What are the effects of denying original sin? What other doctrines depend on original sin? What Bible doctrines are put in jeopardy by rejecting original sin? Does throwing out the doctrine of original sin upset the whole biblical idea of forgiveness and atonement for sin? According to one reformed theologian everything depends upon original sin. He said, "Were this Article of faith (Original Sin) taken away, there would be no Original Sin; the promise of Christ would become void, and all the vital force of our religion would be destroyed." Wow! This doctrine really is the foundation for everything to him!
How can they look around them at this world filled with iniquity and say that there is no need of redemption and no need of a Saviour? Why must the doctrine of original sin, as prescribed by the Catholic Church, be true or there is no need for redemption? “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” is a very obvious fact, with or without the doctrine of original sin. Sin is a reality in the world we live in. It is pure absurdity to say that unless we accept the doctrine of original sin there is nothing that needs fixing. This world is full of sin and in need of a Saviour, but what it needs is a Saviour that will save them from sinning – not just give them a free ticket to heaven while they continue to live in sin, which is exactly what the doctrine of original sin makes provision for.

For some strange reason these people cannot see sin as a willful transgression against God. They see sin ONLY as something long ago and far away, of which they had no part or knowledge, but of which they are guilty in God’s eyes nonetheless. Their conception of sin is that it is some mystical unseen entity or substance that possesses their bodies and acts completely separate from their own will. This mystical, invisible evil is somehow passed from one generation to the next and is the real reason they commit their evil deeds. They had no choice at all in whether they wanted this evil thing in them – God himself made them with this inherent evil and now He blames them for it and intends to judge them and punish them forever for it. No wonder the educated skeptics mock Christianity! How could anyone with any sense of justice accept such a perverted idea of God? It is utter foolishness!

There are no true Bible doctrines that require that the doctrine of original sin be true. Without the doctrine of original sin ALL the major doctrines of the Bible, including sin, the Atonement, redemption, and sanctification, take on such a deeper and more clear meaning. The only doctrines that depend upon original sin are those that encourage or excuse sin. For example, without the doctrine of original sin the idea that sin is a calamity of nature rather than an act of the will against God must be disposed of. This puts the responsibility for sin on man rather than God, and this is exactly what the Scriptures teach:
So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. Rom. 14:12
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezek. 18:20
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin. Deut. 24:16; 2 Kings 14:6; 2 Chron 25:4
In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children’s teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge. Jer. 31:29-30
The Bible couldn’t be clearer about this matter.

If you throw away original sin, the idea that Romans 7 represents the normal Christian experience must be discarded. Romans 7 then must be explained in light of Romans 6 and 8, as well as the rest of the Bible, instead of the man-made doctrine of original sin. This will present a completely different picture of the Christian walk. The only reason anyone would look at Romans 7 and believe living in sin and defeat to be the highest expectation of a Christian in this world is because he is clinging to the doctrine of original sin. Somehow, original sin so blinds the minds of people that they can completely put Romans 6 and 8 out of their mind while they wallow in self-pity and glory in Romans 7 as their experience. Many people are going to wake up in the pits of hell because they have believed a lie and been damned because of this matter. You better know that the Christian experience is not defeat and habitual sin! If you believe that it is, you have been deceived! What will you do with these verses?
Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. Rom. 8:37
Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. 2 Pet. 1:4
For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God. Heb. 7:19
For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. 1 John 5:4
He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. 1 John 3:8 (speaks of continual, habitual sin)
If we get rid of the doctrine of original sin we will have to stop calling ourselves a sinner after we are saved. That would be a good thing, because that is an idea that is wrong, misleading, and leads to many other false teachings and misunderstandings about what salvation is and what it does for a person. We have all heard it a thousand times: “I am just a sinner, saved by grace.” People think it sounds more spiritual and humble to say that about themselves. Apparently, they don’t stop to consider how God feels about such a testimony. After all that He has done for them to save them and give them life and they wallow in self pity and phony humility! They should be giving God glory by rejoicing in the victory, thanking God for deliverance from the bondage of sin.

If you are saved, you are a saint of God – not a sinner! Nowhere in the Bible does God refer to saved people as sinners after they are saved! A sinner is a sinner and a saint is a saint. Again, we’re not saying that a saint cannot sin, but he cannot practice habitual, continual sin. He cannot be classified as a sinner. The only way you can justify such a thing is if you think we are physically, constitutionally sinful. You must think that the body is sinful in and of itself. You must think of sin as something besides an act of your will against God. You must think of it as something you cannot help. You must think of it as something beyond your control. This is the result of believing in the doctrine of original sin. Instead of being grieved for their sin they glory in it. “We are such sinners, yet God loves us anyway.” Hogwash! That is a total misrepresentation of sin, of salvation, and of God’s attitude and disposition! Sin is a crime – it is not an accident, it is not a tragedy, it is not unavoidable! God loves the sinner and desires for him to repent. God works in his heart to draw him to Christ so that he can see what God has done to redeem him. But if he continues in his sin and refuses to turn he will face the judgment and wrath of God. He is much more likely to repent when he understands his sin is HIS FAULT and not something that was imposed upon him without his consent.

We could go on and on about the false teachings and doctrines that encourage sin and how they all depend upon the false doctrine of original sin. But let’s take a look at another aspect of this matter. Is the doctrine of original sin in harmony with the other major doctrines of the Bible? Absolutely not! Here are a few examples to consider:

Salvation is by grace through faith.
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Eph. 2:8
Salvation is available because “while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.”
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16
God has no desire to see anyone perish, but neither does He owe salvation to any man. God didn’t provide the means for us to be saved out of obligation, but out of love, mercy, and goodness. It is such an obvious fact to anyone who is acquainted with the Bible that it would be a waste of time to keep laboring to prove this point.

If the doctrine of original sin is true then salvation cannot be of grace, but of justice. If God formed us in the womb and so constituted us that sin is natural and righteousness is unnatural, then He cannot condemn us for sin and still be just. The only way He can maintain his justice is to offer salvation, and if man takes it, well, but if he rejects it, then God is clear in the matter. Salvation then is based on justice rather than grace, and one of the major doctrines of salvation is turned on its head.

Another major doctrine that is fundamental to the faith is the sinlessness of Christ. The doctrine of original sin necessarily makes Jesus a sinner or it denies his humanity. If it is a true doctrine then at least one of these major fundamentals of the faith must be denied. To deny the humanity of Jesus Christ is a serious error that the Bible mentions in particular. The person who denies that Jesus is come in the flesh is marked as “antichrist” in the Word of God.
For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. 2 John 1:7
Allow me to explain: Original sin says that flesh is evil, and that this evil is passed from generation to generation. Defenders of this doctrine use these verses out of Job to prove that a sinner always produces another sinner naturally:
Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one. Job 14:4
What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous? Job 15:14
The humanity of Jesus Christ is very plainly taught in the Bible. Without the humanity of Christ all the promises of God concerning salvation are empty and meaningless.
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John 1:14
Jesus was made flesh – the same flesh that we are made of. His was not some special kind of flesh that was invincible to sin, but the same as ours in all points.
Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; Heb. 2:14
Jesus didn’t just lower himself a little and become an angel – He came all the way down to where we are. He didn’t have the nature of an angel, but of a normal man.
For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham. Heb. 2:16
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. Heb. 2:17
For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Heb. 4:15
The Bible teaches plainly that Jesus was in all respects a man. He had a human body and was born of a woman, who offered her sin offering as prescribed by Moses after He was born. He hungered, He thirsted, He wept, He laughed, He grew weary, He rested, and He slept. He was angry, He felt compassion on others, He loved, and He lived and died just like other men live and die. Just as we are partakers of flesh and blood, “he also himself likewise took part OF THE SAME.” He was IN ALL THINGS …made like unto his brethren.” Now, either Jesus was born with a sinful nature, just like we are – or we ARE NOT born with a sinful nature. He was made like us IN ALL THINGS. The defenders of original sin refuse to give up the idea that we are born with a sinful nature, yet they say Christ was not. In order to do this they must deny the humanity of Christ. According to them, his body was NOT like ours. Besides contradicting all the above Scriptures they are clearly guilty of what 2 John 7 warns - that people who promote this teaching are antichrist.

Baptist and others outside the Catholic Church who believe in the doctrine of original sin have no answer to this dilemma. The Catholic Church realized the corner they had painted themselves into long ago and came up with the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception. Somehow, Mary was born without a sinful nature and that is how Jesus could be born without one. Never mind that no such thing is found anywhere in the Bible, but original sin MUST be protected and defended.

There are those who try to say that since Jesus had no earthly father his blood was God’s blood. There are many problems with that, the first one being that God is a spirit and a spirit has no blood. God is not flesh and blood – He is spirit. (John 4:24) He BECAME flesh through the virgin birth of Jesus. God doesn’t have 46 chromosomes – that is flesh, and God is a spirit. GOD WAS MADE FLESH and dwelt among us. He WAS MADE like unto his brethren in all things. Nothing about the fleshly body of Jesus was different than anyone else ever born on the earth. We have heard a lot about the sinless blood of Jesus, but the fact is, He was entirely sinless; his hands, his feet, his eyes, his tongue, He was the sinless Saviour, but it wasn’t because his flesh was somehow different than ours. He was tempted “in all points” as we are, but He overcame temptation with the same things available to us – the Holy Spirit and the Word of God. The big difference was that He was GOD in a body of flesh – just like the body you and I have. The virgin birth was simply the means for God to become flesh – not a miracle to produce some different kind of fleshly body for God to live in.

He was the “second Adam.” He came to undo what Adam had done – in all points. Where Adam failed Jesus succeeded. Adam brought sin into the world and death because of sin. Jesus brought life by overcoming sin and the world, while living in a body of flesh.
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world. John 16:33
Blood always represents life in the Bible – not death. Jesus shed his blood (and gave his life) so that we might have eternal life. That blood represented the sinless, victorious life that Jesus lived while on earth in a body of flesh just like ours, and the resurrection proves it.

Hallelujah!

Away with a doctrine that would take away the humanity of Christ! Only the devil could be the author of such a dishonor to our Saviour!
 

Next Part - How Does Original Sin Affect Other Bible Doctrines - Part 2