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). 

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?

Dialoguing Logically With A Sin Nature Proponent

We have endeavored on this website to explain many of the hangups concerning the “doctrine” of sin nature, but one thing we have not yet done is explained what is meant by sin nature, and how that definition is logically understood. From that logical framework other doctrines in Christianity invariably must be affected. Tim has often told me that once he understood sin nature, and all of its side effects, the Bible opened up to him in a way that he’d never thought possible. I must agree with him, because indeed, my own personal Bible study profoundly changed once I understood the issues surrounding sin nature. It seems every day something new is revealed to me that I would have never realized, or would never have understood, if I continued to hold to my former opinions. With that in mind, I have had five separate conversations in the last 2 weeks about sin nature. Each discussion was different, as they all came about their viewpoint from a different angle, yet one issue was the same in all of the encounters, and indeed it is the same issue in every possible sin nature debate – the cause of sin.

Bear with me as I endeavor to logically explain the doctrine of sin nature, as is commonly offered in dialogue (Do understand, those who hold to this, in my opinion, faulty doctrine, have no Biblical basis for their belief. That being the case, they always resort to some form of logical reasoning to prove their case). It never fails that every time I, or anyone else, expose sin nature’s errors Biblically, that the sin nature proponent retreats into logic, and never offers scripture for their defense. Their arguments, though the words may be different, essentially all follow the same pattern, and is thus stated –

SN (Sin Nature): We all sin, because we have a sin nature.

Me: So, we have no choice but to sin?

SN: No, sin is a choice that we all have.

Me: Then we do not have a sin nature, because sin nature by definition means that we’re born programmed to sin, therefore it's part of our nature.

SN: Well, yes, because Adam sinned, we all sin.

Me: So, we’re guilty of Adam’s sin? Is that just? The Bible says that every man is put to death because of his own sin (Ez. 18:20).

Usually, at this point, the sin nature proponent begins creating straw man arguments.

SN: So you’re saying that we are sinlessly perfect?

Me: Why draw that conclusion?

SN: Because without a sin nature, we’d never sin, or mankind is born perfect, and could live a perfect sinless life.

Me: Why?

SN: Because he’d have no cause for sin.

Now, at this point a vital issue has arisen. The cause of sin. Biblically speaking the person convicted of sin always seeks a cause for sin that does not make him guilty of his own sin. Reference Genesis 3 for instance. God called upon Adam, and exposed his sin. Adam immediately shifted blame to God for creating Eve. Eve, now under pressure, implicated the serpent (Satan). Adam and Eve were both looking for someone to blame for their sin, or in other words, excuse themselves from guilt and punishment for their actions. God listened, and then he punished all three for their actions. Bottom line – sin is an action.

Me: What is the definition of sin from the Bible?

SN: (usually) I do not know.

Me: According to I John 3:4 sin is a transgression of the Law. That implies that sin is an action, not a nature or a substance.

SN: Yes, but why do we sin?

Me: James 1 tells us that we are drawn away of our own lusts, and when lust hath conceived it bringeth for sin.

SN: See, where did the lust come from? Our sin nature.

Another pause for a moment. Lust is not sin. James 1 is not calling lust sin. James is saying that lust can be the spark for sin. Much like a firestarter is not fire, but it can start a fire. Let me explain further. Mankind does have desires. God created them, and programmed them into Man’s nature. This may seem semantic, but it’s another vital issue. Man was indeed created to eat, drink, sleep, procreate. Eating, Drinking, Sleeping, and Sex are not sin, though each one of those actions can be sin. Here is how. When the desire arises to have sex, mankind has a choice: have non-sinning sex, which can only be done in marriage, or have no sex. The desire is indeed natural, and is not sinful, because it is a God given desire. Sex only becomes sin when man chooses to reject God’s boundaries for sex (marriage), and have it outside of marriage.

On that point I am not neglecting what Jesus Christ said about lusting after a woman. One must take what Christ said in context, and the context was adultery (sex outside of marriage). When He was talking about looking with lust, the implication was lusting to have sex with that woman. It is not a sin to hold the opinion that a woman is beautiful. It is a sin to want to have sex with that woman because she is beautiful, however. In other words, the temptation arises, and man has a choice. Think the woman is beautiful, and don’t sin, or think the woman is beautiful and sin. In either situation, there is a natural desire, but the natural desire is not sin until that desire is used to transgress God’s Law.

Me: Who creates the baby in the womb?

SN: God.

Me: God does the creating, and God created man with certain desires/passions?

SN: Yes, but because of Adam’s sin, we've all been corrupted.

Me: So, God creates man in the womb with the corruption of sin?

SN: You’re putting words into my mouth.

Me: No, this is the logical implication. If we’re born with a sin nature (A Cause for sin), and only God can create the baby in the womb, then it is God’s fault that we sin.

SN: It’s Adam’s fault, not God’s fault!

At this point, it must be understood that God is the Creator, and there is much scripture about God doing the forming of the Baby in the womb (consider Isaiah 44:2, Jeremiah 1:5, and Psalm 139:13-14). This is indeed, rightly in the argument’s context, what the Atheist uses against those who claim sin nature. They logically deduce God as being the creator of man, and the sin nature of man, because God is the only Creator according to the Christian. How does the Christian argue against the Atheist’s logic, if he holds the sin nature doctrine?

Me: Because of Adam’s sin, God then cursed Adam and his progeny by giving them a sin nature?

SN: Yes.

Me: Therefore, we sin, because Adam sinned, and God then cursed mankind for Adam’s sin?

SN: Yes.

Me: Then it is indeed God’s fault according to your position. Now, here’s my question, where in Genesis 3 did God specifically outline that a punishment for Adam’s sin would be that his progeny would sin?

SN: So, you’re saying we could live a sinlessly perfect life!?

The sin nature argument does not have an answer for this, which is why they will always revert to straw-man or ad-hominem arguments. They cannot give scripture, thankfully. Because if they could then the Atheist is right in arguing that God created man to sin as a punishment for Adam’s sin. This would be horrifically unjust, and God is not unjust.

Me: Again, I have never said that we would live a sinlessly perfect life. What I am saying is that there is no cause for sin, other than mankind choosing to sin. It is our fault, not Adam’s. Not God’s.

SN: But we sin, and the Bible says that sin came into the world through Adam.

Me: Yes, Romans 5:12 does say that sin entered into the world by Adam. He was the first man to sin, but he was not the first to sin, Satan was (without flesh I might add, ultimately sin is a spiritual issue, not a flesh issue).  Yet, Romans 5:12 does not say that sin passed upon all men. It says that death passed upon all men. That is part of the curse, and that is outlined in Genesis 3.

SN: Yes, and we all die, because we all sin.

Me: That’s what the verse says.

SN: Later in the chapter it says that all men were made sinners in Adam.

Me: No, the verse says that many were made sinners, many does not mean all. If it indeed does say or mean all, then the second part of the verse would have to mean that all were made righteous because of Christ. All are not righteous, however. If we’re all made sinners in Adam, then we must also all be made righteous by Christ. Yet, the verse says many choose Adam's way and sin, and many choose Christ and are made righteous. Sin is a choice, just like salvation is a choice. Either way, Romans 5 in total context is about death, notice how many times “death” is mentioned from 12-21, and contrast that with “life” in Christ. You can only have life when sin is overcome in/through Christ.

SN: So you’re saying sinless perfection?

Ok, now I can completely understand why this question arises at this point now. Though, it’s still not the Bible’s point.

Me: Can you Biblically repent of a sin nature?

SN: No.

Me: Then no one could be saved, because repentance is certainly concerned with Godly sorrow for your own willful sin. I can never be guilty, or feel Godly sorrow, for Adam’s sin. I did not do it, he did. If I have a sin nature because of him, and God creating me to sin, then I will never feel guilty for sin, it’s not my fault, it’s someone else’s fault. Further, if I “naturally” sin, because it is in my DNA, then I can never turn from that innate/inherent sin.

SN: So, then you are saying that man is born sinless, and can live a sinless life from birth to death?

Me: No, sin is a spiritual issue, and no man can stand against Satan. According to II Cor. 4:4, Satan is the one doing the blinding of man’s mind. He has many tools at his disposal to affect mankind, such as his own fallen angel army, the world, and the flesh. Man’s flesh is indeed finite, and very limited. It has those God-given desires, but Satan uses his tools to effect sin in every man’s life. Christ called Satan the father of sin in John 8, and it is indeed Satan’s goal to make all mankind his children by tempting them to sin. Neither you, nor I can stand against Satan for very long without the power of Jesus Christ. But you cannot have the power of Jesus Christ until you admit you’re a sinner, because you willfully sin. No excuses. Sin nature is an excuse. It makes someone else guilty of sin, not you. You’re guilty, because you choose to sin, but you do not have to sin. You choose to sin, not because Adam sinned.

SN: So, you never sin again after Salvation?

Me: No, you still have Satan fighting against you, which is why you are equipped with the armor mentioned in Ephesians 6. You are now equipped with God’s power through Jesus Christ to fight Satan, and win. You will no longer abide in sin, as you once did, and are on a new path through Christ. But Satan won’t give up, and his power is great. All he needs is a little opening in which to strike. When he finds that opening, usually when we’re at our weakest, that is, when our natural God-given desires must be fulfilled, then Satan attempts to strike. Those desires/lusts do have to be answered, either to gratification according to God’s boundaries, or gratification according to sin. The fact that the enemy can or does inflict damage upon you in no way takes you out of the army. You’re still a soldier of Christ, and are never to be killed by sin spiritually, because of Christ’s shed blood. But in the course of battle, you can suffer cuts, bruises, and broken bones. You just won’t indulge in them to death as you once did. Let me phrase it this way, can you go without sinning for at least 2 seconds?
SN: Yes.
Me: Life is made up of two second choices. If you can avoid sin for 2 seconds, you can keep avoiding sin when the next 2 seconds transpire. Do you think you could string enough two second periods together for 5 minutes?
SN: Yes.
Me: Now the point is that you can do that, willfully. But there is no one who has been able to string 70 years together of those sin-free 2 second time periods. 

It should be pointed out that if sin nature is indeed a Bible doctrine, and repentance is a Bible doctrine, then the Bible’s many commands to turn from sin would indeed be implying for sinless perfection. I have yet to receive a clear, coherent argument as to why this could not logically be the case. Further, I find it interesting the line of logic that tries to hold both positions to be true, that is, sin nature and repentance. Perhaps someone can offer me an argument that satisfies my question? Regardless, the sin nature advocate has to deny being able to resist sin for even 2 seconds. He would have to say that all of his works, good or evil, are sin. This simply does not fit the rest of scripture, and I offer I John 3:22 as an example.

The dialogue I have offered is not far-fetched. In fact everything stated therein has been spoken, or written, to me in the distant and recent past. I am not putting words into anyone’s mouths, that would not help anyone if I did. My point is to reveal logical outgrowths from the most commonly used faulty logic when discussing sin nature. I pray that it is a useful and God-glorifying tool to enlighten your hearts with His truth. Please, feel free to ask any questions or add any comments. I wholeheartedly and sincerely do not want to be wrong on this, as it most certainly has eternal consequences.

Nota Bene: I understand that the dialogue is not exhaustive. The essential points have, however, been covered. For more in depth questions about specific passages or other issues, please visit our Sin Nature Links page.

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 - Part 9: Spiritual Death? by Mike Miller

The doctrine of original sin has so many tentacles reaching out in so many directions that is an overwhelming task to try to cover them all. Its origin isn’t found in one single misinterpreted Scripture or idea, but in many. Sometimes it is hard to tell if a doctrine has been spun off of original sin or if it is itself one of the foundations for original sin. Such is the idea of spiritual death.

No where does the Bible speak of spiritual death. The Bible never says the spirit dies, or ever has died. There is no evidence whatsoever to prove that Adam’s spirit died when he ate the forbidden fruit. Yet for most Christians who claim to believe the Bible this is a major doctrine. The idea of spiritual death is foundational to their understanding of the Atonement and salvation. Naturally, when you start off with a false teaching that isn’t even mentioned or hinted at in the Bible you are going to get really off-track in your understanding of other things.

The spirit is always associated with life in the Bible – never with death. I challenge you to get a concordance and search it out. You will not find any mention of a spirit dying anywhere, anytime, since God created man.

Man is a three-fold being, made in the image of God. Man consists of body, soul, and spirit. To try to separate them into three separate entities is like trying to separate the Godhead – it can’t be done. What we can do is see the manifestation of each one.

The body is easiest for us to understand because we can see it with our eyes and feel it with our senses. The body is the means by which we experience the physical world we live in. The body dies. That is a fact of life. When the body dies we can no longer experience the world or things of the world, because the body is the only means we have for doing that. It is over! A dead body doesn’t come back to life, no matter what the doctors do. Everyone since Adam has died eventually, and we can be assured that everyone that is alive now will also die unless they are caught up when the Lord returns.

The soul is the essence of who we are. It is our consciousness. The soul will live on after the body is gone back to dust. Man is a living soul – not just a body. And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. Gen. 2:7
Your soul is YOU, with your affections, your desires, your opinions, and beliefs. The soul is sometimes referred to in the Bible as the heart. It is where sin originates and comes from.
For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: Matt. 15:19
The soul can be lost. The soul can die in the sense of being separated from God forever.
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. Ezek. 18:20
The spirit is the means by which we experience God. God is a spirit and to even be aware of his existence is a spiritual exercise. We cannot communicate with God outside of the spirit, and if we have a dead spirit, or no spirit, God cannot communicate with us. By the way, how could you be born with a dead spirit? A dead spirit is one that doesn’t even exist. A spirit is not physical and not a body. When the soul and spirit leave the body it is dead, but what could be separated from the spirit to make it dead? Whenever you read of the spirit in the Bible it is always associated with life. The spirit is not something that can die.

The argument is that God told Adam that “in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die,” (Gen. 2:17) and they reason that since Adam didn’t drop dead immediately he must have died spiritually. Most people automatically accept that as a good explanation, but don’t consider the fact that there is no Scripture to back it up. Someone just dreamed up that idea one day. The Bible just doesn’t teach that Adam died spiritually. What the Bible does teach is that Adam brought sin into the world and death came with it – physical death. Every person since Adam, except One, has sinned and died, or will die – physically.
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Rom. 5:12
And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died. Gen. 5:5
God said they would die and they did. So has every sinner since Adam, and those who are alive and sinning at this moment will also die. Death is a fact of life and a certainty.

More of the reasoning to defend the idea of spiritual death is found in Ephesians 2:1:
And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;
Since the natural man cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14) they cannot conceive any idea of death that isn’t literal, with a body lying there to prove it. “Dead” must mean DEAD, like a body lying in a casket. Obviously, they aren’t literally dead, so it MUST mean they are spiritually dead, they reason. Their spirit must be dead and that is why they are unresponsive to God. The truth is that they are SEPARATED from God because of their sin, just like Adam and Eve were. Sin SEPARATES and that is likened unto death in the Bible.

Jesus gave us a very clear example of this in the story of the prodigal son. He LEFT his father and WENT astray. It was HIS OWN doing – NOT his raising, NOT his genes, NOT anything his father or mother, or anyone else did. HE wanted his own way with no restraints or boundaries in his life. When he returned his father said two different times that his son “was DEAD, and is alive again.” (Luke 15:24, 32) Now we know the prodigal son was not literally dead, but he was separated from his father because of his sin. He was not so dead that he couldn’t “come to himself” and remembering his father’s goodness, to say, “I will arise and go to my father.” Neither was he too dead to get up and do it. There was something in him that could still be touched by the goodness of his father. It should be noticed that the father didn’t do anything to contact him while he was in the far country. He didn’t send for him, he didn’t send him a ticket home or do anything for him. What brought the son around was what he ALREADY knew about his father and his father’s house. It was what he ALREADY knew about his father’s character and all that his father had done for him in the past. It was what he ALREADY knew about how his father treated everyone else, including his hired servants.
The spirit of man is the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the belly. Prov. 20:27
But there is a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding. Job 32:8
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him…1 Cor. 2:11
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. Eccl. 12:7
Likewise, there is still something in man with which God has to work to enlighten us. That something is the spirit of man, which is not dead or non-existent. The Bible speaks of man’s spirit as if it is present in man. There are no Scriptures that teach that the spirit is dead.

You may believe this is not that important, but it is. You see, if our spirit is dead and God cannot communicate with us, then God has to literally DO something to each individual to “quicken” them before they can even realize that He exists. Now the truth is that God IS the initiator but He has done that through sending his Son to die in our place and make atonement for our sin. When Jesus said it was finished – it was finished. He will not come down and FORCE anyone to look to him. Now the Spirit of God works through the preaching of the Word of God and the testimony of his saints to cause people to consider God. If they have no spirit then all our preaching and all our godly living is in vain, as far as having any influence on them. Besides that, the Bible teaches in Romans 1, for example, that the invisible things of God can be clearly seen in his creation, so that they are without excuse. Without a spirit they would not be able to see those things at all.
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Rom. 1:20
If the spirit of man is dead and God must do something to each individual to quicken them BEFORE they can begin to consider the things of God, then the Calvinistic teaching of election which says that God just picks out a few and the hates the rest, is true. There is no need for you to seek God because if you aren’t one of the elect there is no hope for you. You should just wait on God and if He DOES something to you then you’ll know, if not, then you have no hope anyway. Thanks be to God for his Word, which plainly denies such a wicked teaching:
That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. John 1:9
The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe. John 1:7
And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Eph. 3:9
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 1 Tim. 2:4
For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, Titus 2:11
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 2 Pet. 3:9
If there is anything that is clear in the Word of God it is the fact that God wants ALL men to be saved, and that He has made provision and provided the means for ALL to come to him. Sadly, not all men WILL come. They hate the light because their deeds are evil. It isn’t that their spirit is dead, and it isn’t because they do not understand and God has left them out – it is because their heart is hard because of their sin.

The idea of spiritual death fits very well into the doctrine of original sin and all its framework of wrong understandings. It is just another offspring of this doctrine that makes it easier for men to sin, and harder for them to repent and turn to God. This is the mark of EVERY tentacle that grows from this false teaching of the ancient Gnostic cults and the church in Rome – it makes sin a objective matter and removes our personal responsibility. It takes the power out of the true Gospel message and makes sinners feel sorry for themselves rather than guilty before God. Jesus never taught a single doctrine that has that effect on sinners. Neither did any of the apostles, including Paul. It is leaven that, without a doubt, was introduced by the devil himself. Mark any doctrine that has these tendencies and get rid of it. It is mud in the water and you will be amazed how God will open your eyes and you will begin to see all things clearly when you lay it aside and just believe the Word of God instead of the false teachings of men.

Next part: Why Every Person Should Know That Original Sin Isn't True

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?

Which Are You? A Test.

Are you Augustinian? Platonic? Gnostic? Manichean? Calvinist? Arminian? Protestant? Catholic? Or Biblical? Which one?

You may not even know which one you are, watch this 1hr 27min video to see the root of what you might actually believe and not realize it.

Prove all things, hold fast that which is good. - I Thess. 5:21

Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?
- I Cor. 13:5

http://www.dividingword.net/Original%20Sin/Augustine%20and%20Original%20Sin.mp4

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