Natural Born Sinner?
Few doctrines like Total Hereditary Depravity start a person off on the wrong foot spiritually when it comes to understanding the Bible’s teaching on sin and salvation. Despite the fact that it leads to erroneous teachings on the cross of Christ, it distorts the responsibility, accountability and feasibility of answering for personal sin by teaching the sinner to say (or at least think), “It’s all Adam’s fault and I can’t help the way I’m born.”
Sadly, by un-originally twisting the scriptures some even try to use Paul’s masterpiece on sin, law, faith, grace and salvation found in Romans to teach the existence of “original sin.” The abuse of Romans 5:12-19 disregards the fact that one doesn’t deserve spiritual death because we’re born any more than one deserves spiritual life because we’re born again!
Babies born guilty of the sin of Adam? That’s just something inconceivable according to the scriptures (Ezekiel 18:20).
Richard Parsons are discussing. 
Don Merritt 8:27 pm on April 18, 2012 Permalink |
Nicely done Eugene! Very well put; and pithy! Thank you for writing it!
Eugene Adkins 6:22 am on April 19, 2012 Permalink |
Thank you, Don.
laodeciapress 8:52 pm on April 18, 2012 Permalink |
What about passages like Psalm 51, especially verse 5: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity,
And in sin my mother conceived me.”?
Also, would you then take the view that if infants die right at or soon after birth they have no need of Christ’s atonement?
Could it be that Ezekiel 18 is a response to a faulty proverb spreading through Israel that abolished personal responsibility for sin? This doesn’t mean that humans aren’t born with a fallen nature.
We are born with a fallen nature and we are also responsible for our sins. Without Christ, we are truly in a hopeless state.
Eugene Adkins 6:20 am on April 19, 2012 Permalink |
Hello Laodecia,
Look at Psalm 51:5 in context with the rest of the psalm. In verse 1 David says the transgression belongs to him. In verse 2 David says it was his inquity and his sin. In verse 3 David says it was his transgression and his sin. In verse 4 David says it is his sin. Then in verse 5 David supposedly tries to shift the blame??? That just doesn’t fit what David’s saying.
David was feeling about as low as he ever felt spiriutally and he used words to reflect his personal feelings on his personal life – there is nothing universal there to be found! David’s sin wasn’t his mother’s fault, Bathsheba’s fault or Adam’s fault – it was his own fault.
Psalm 51:5 is hyperbole. It reflected the lifestyle that he had fallen into. David was no more literally brought forth in inquity any more than Job literally guided the widow from his mother’s womb (Job 31:18).
As far as you mentioning the atonement, I don’t know if you understand the meaning of the word. Atonement is needed for those who have sinned. Babies have not sinned. It’s that simple.
Plus, if you subscribe to the rest of Calvinism’s destortion of the atoning work of Jesus on the cross (like unconditional election) then it doesn’t matter because God has already decided who’s going to Heaven and Hell before the baby was born to begin with. And according to Calvinism there are babies that die who will be going to hell! So your question has no real point.
Lastly, to your comment about Ezekiel. You’re missing the whole point of Ezekiel 18. God’s word is saying that children will not be held spiritually accountable for the sins of the previous generations. Ezekiel 18:20 says the soul that sins will die – not the soul that’s born. You won’t find one time in the scriptures where God says the rest of mankind is spiritually responsible for the sin of Adam and Eve. Don’t confuse repercussions from with responsibility for.
If we are born with a fallen nature then we’re not responsible for our sins! You can’t blame a square peg for not fitting into a round hole. Paul said. “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned—” (Romans 5:12) Paul DID NOT say death spread to all because all were born sinners.
God bless in your studies.
laodeciapress 11:05 am on April 19, 2012 Permalink
Thanks for the response!
It seems like your view is that if one is born with a fallen nature, they are not responsible for their sins. I just don’t see this as a Biblical view.
I’m also a little confused as to what you believe we inherited from Adam’s sin. If it’s simply an evil world, doesn’t that set us up for sin and abolish some responsibility in your view?
I think this passage from Romans 9 describes the sovereignty/responsibility phenomenon better than I ever could:
Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, “THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER.” Just as it is written, “JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.”
What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, “I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION.” So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles
Eugene Adkins 6:42 pm on April 19, 2012 Permalink
Hello again Laodeica,
You said, “If it’s simply an evil world, doesn’t that set us up for sin and abolish some responsibility in your view?”
I don’t get what your question is trying to prove. Total Herditary Depravity does away with all responsibility to sin. Sin is a choice, and if one is born a sinner they have no choice but to sin. The scriptures teach that it is not God who makes mankind sin. To say such a thing is an affront to God’s holiness and goodness. “Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.” (James 1:13-15) This is exactly what Adam and Eve did and it’s what people still do today.
God created Adam and Eve upright and sinless, but yet they still sinned. Now if Adam and Eve could sin and not be born sinners then there is no scriptural reason why the same truth cannot be applied to people today. The heart of mankind goes astray (Romans 3:12) – it is not born astray (Ecclesiastes 7:29).
As to your comment, “I think this passage from Romans 9 describes the sovereignty/responsibility phenomenon better than I ever could” you are completely missing the point of Romans 9-11.
To understand what Paul is talking about here you have to keep in mind the historical context of the verses he’s quoting along with the purpose of the book of Romans to begin with.
You highlighted the part that says, “THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER”. Now where in the world is there anything about salvation in there? Calvinism does a lot of far-fetched jumping. It jumps from Adam sinning to everyone being guilty of Adam’s sin instead of their own (Romans 5:12). It also jumps from God using nations to bring Jesus Christ into the world to give all nations the chance to be saved (Romans 10:11-13) to determining that God has decided which individuals are worth saving regardless of their reaction. The context about Jacob and Esau is about nations my friend, not individuals (Genesis 25:23). The context of the clay and potter is about nations my friend, not individuals (Jeremiah 18:1-10). It’s about Jews and Gentiles as a whole. Look at verse 24 that you stopped at again.
If you will keep the theme of chapters 9-11 in mind (well actually the whole book Romans up through chapter 11) you will find it’s about God working His plan to bring the Messiah into the world for all people (Romans 1:16,17). God used Jacob to bring the Messiah into the world and not Esau. God used Pharaoh (whom hardned his own heart and God was only “responsible” for hardening his heart by doing the judgments that Pharaoh refused to acknowledge) to display His mercy to the nation of Israel – - which was used to bring the Messiah into the world.
God is the potter without a doubt, but what Calvinism ignores is that God DOESN’T ignore the way that the clay reacts to Him. The very verses after the potter and clay theme is introduced says -”Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 6 “O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?” says the Lord. “Look, as the clay is in the potter’s hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel! 7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10 if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.” (Jeremiah 18:5-10)
Check that out! God saying in His omnipotent way that He allows the clay to determine whether or not it wants to listen to Him. And if you read Jeremiah you will find that God wanted Judah to repent but they refused (Jeremiah 13:11; 29:19). In Romans 9-11 Paul is talking about how God opened up His grace and mercy as wide as it possibly could be opened through the gospel which included extending it to the Gentile nations, not narrowing His grace and mercy like Calvinism does with “unconditional election” and “limited atonement”.
You’re not seeing the forrest for the trees when it comes to Romans 9 and God’s elect my friend. The “foundational proof text” (Psalm 51:5) of Calvinism has crumbled, and so the rest of Calvinism falls in on top of it. To say that one is born completely depraved but yet with enough room to be responsible completely ignores the definition of completely!
God bless in your studies, Laodicea.
laodeciapress 9:35 pm on April 19, 2012 Permalink |
Sorry about that confusion, the verses were capitalized because they were from the OT.
I still think you misunderstand Calvinism doctrine. Total depravity does not abolish responsibility for sin, nor does it say we are only responsible for Adam’s sin and not our own. If you care to look into things a bit more, there’s a book by James White called “The Potters Freedom” which gives a really good description of the Biblical basis of Calvinism.
I don’t agree with your description of Romans 9, or of the book of Romans in general. The language of Paul is very clear that this is personal, and I believe he responds to the very argument you present:
-So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.
-You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?”
-On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God?
Psalm 51:5 is still very clear. David recognizes that he is so in need of God’s grace that he was, in fact, sinful from the time his mother conceived him.
Sorry for the confusion on my question. It was poorly worded. I was asking what you believe we inherited from Adam’s sin. If you believe we did inherit something, does this take away some responsibility?
Without original sin, you have people dying free of sin. This makes statements in the Bible that “all have sinned” simply not true. If you take the whole Bible into consideration, we clearly see that man is hopelessly sinful from birth, responsible for their sin, and will die in their sin unless they receive forgiveness through Christ’s death.
Eugene Adkins 6:46 am on April 20, 2012 Permalink |
Good morning Laodicea,
I understand the doctrine of Calvinism very well. I have watched debates, read books (although not the one you referred to), talked to others, and by the way I raised to believe in certain points of the TULIP in the baptist church. So I would say my familiarity with Calvinism is better than average.
To settle the THD disagreement remember that Calvinism teaches that children are totally depraved and not capable of doing anything good whatsoever. If they cannot do anything good, then what does that leave them with? It leaves them with deserving God’s wrath despite the fact that they can’t do any better??? How can they possibly be responsible for something that they are not responsible for? That’s not the spiritual wrath I read about. That wrath is earned, not given freely (Romans 6:23). We don’t earn condemnation by being born any more than we earn justification by being born again.
Psalm 51:5 is clear. The first 4 verses David says it’s all my fault and he doesn’t change his story in verse 5. It was the same hyperbole that Job used when he said he came from his mother’s womb guiding the widow (which is something not possible according to THD).
You said, “Without original sin, you have people dying free of sin.” I say with original sin you have everyone dying in sin – including babies on their way to Hell. No one being true to Calvinist doctrine will deny this.
You said, “This makes statements in the Bible that “all have sinned” simply not true.” The ALL refers those who have reached the age of accountability (Deut. 1:39; Jonah 4:11). Read Romans 7:9. When was Paul alive spiritually before the Law? Never, according to Calvinism this is impossible because he would have been born dead, but Paul said he was! Tell me friend according to your understanding of all, is “Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came to ALL men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man’s righteous act the free gift came to ALL men, resulting in justification of life” (Romans 5:18) telling the truth? The free gift of justification to ALL men? Not according to Calvinism – not according to Limited Atonement and Irresistable Grace. Nevertheless, there you have it. ALL men were given that gift that resulted in justification of life.
Do you see the point? The ALL of Romans 3:23 refers to those who have chosen to walk in Adam’s steps just as the ALL who are justified are those who have chosen to walk in the steps of Jesus (Romans 3:26; 5:12, 18-19).
If you take the whole Bible into consideration you will a God who implores ALL of mankind to come to Him. Not just some “unconditional elect.” If you take the whole Bible into consideration you will find that man chooses to sin, and that God chose to give His Son for the whole world that whosoever believes Him might have life. THD and the rest of Calvinism is a complete misrepresentation of God’s omnipotence and the gospel of Jesus Christ (1 John 2:2).
To your last part when you said, “and will die in their sin unless they receive forgiveness through Christ’s death.” My friend remember, according to Calvinism’s THD they are already dead in their sin, and without the Unconditional Election of God’s choosing they have no hope of finding life in Jesus, and because of Limited Atonement not everyone CAN receive forgiveness through Christ’s death because Christ didn’t die for everyone!
You see how awful it is to warn people about dying in their sins when they can’t do anything about it! That’s the falsehood of Calvinism for you, not the truth of the gospel.