Are Men Born Sinners? - Library of Theology

More documents

Recommendations

Info

had true human nature like other men, by teaching that Jesus could not have had the same human nature as other men without being a sinner. It takes away the heart and soul of the Gospel, the biblical truth that God saves his people from their sins, by teaching that the Christian cannot live even for one day without sinning in thought, word, or deed. It contradicts and weakens the spirit of holiness that shines from every page of the Holy Bible, when it teaches that God's work of holiness in the church must wait until the church gets to heaven because of the "remaining corruptions of original sin." It destroys innumerable promises that God has given to the church, promises that the church can overcome sin, the world, the flesh, and the devil. And in doing this, it also limits the power of the Holy One of Israel, making sin infinitely more powerful than the power of his sanctifying grace through his indwelling Holy Spirit. Every which way it turns, the doctrine of original sin either takes away some glorious truth from the Bible, or it adds some grotesque teaching that contradicts the Bible. It brings confusion to Gospel truth, making the doctrines of mercy, grace, guilt, pardon, and repentance unintelligible. It makes the holy, just, and loving God to be cruel and unjust, and it makes the wicked sinner to be the unfortunate recipient of a nature which he could not avoid. It is a stumbling-block to the church, encouraging many who call themselves Christians to live a life so far below the Bible standard of holiness and true Christianity that they will ultimately fall into a hypocrite's hell. 13. It is ridiculous, absurd, and unreasonable. It contradicts the necessary and irresistible affirmations of every man's consciousness and reason, something that no Biblical doctrine could do. The necessary affirmations of every man's reason testify that the doctrine of original sin is false. But some Christians object that we should not appeal to reason in determining the truth or falseness of doctrines, and that if we do, we will go off into error. There exists, at least among some Christians, the superstition that man's God-given reason cannot be trusted, that it is subversive of the Word of God, and that if we accepted its necessary and irresistible affirmations, the doctrines of the Bible would be overthrown. But just the opposite is true. Man's reason and consciousness are in harmony with the Bible and confirm its teachings. But how is it that some Christians can actually believe that reason will overthrow the doctrines of the Bible? I answer: by believing doctrines that they know are contradicted by reason, and believing that these doctrines are taught in the Bible. Let's explain: All the truths of the Bible are in harmony with man's reason, his moral nature, and his consciousness. The Scriptures never teach anything which our consciousness and rational moral nature declare to be false, unjust, or impossible. The fundamental truths of Christianity cannot be in manifest contradiction to reason. Yet the doctrine of original sin does contradict reason, reality, and man's irresistible convictions of justice. But Christians have been taught to believe it is a biblical doctrine. At the same time, they are conscious that it contradicts their reason and their convictions of justice. The result is that
they think reason is to be distrusted and rejected as an evil that would overthrow the doctrines of the Bible if relied on! But I repeat what I said in a former chapter: Would those who believe in the doctrine of original sin reject reason if the doctrine of original sin were reasonable? What is the reason that they reject reason when discussing original sin? It is because reason rejects the original sin dogma. If our reason told us that it would be just and righteous for a whole race to be condemned for the sin of one man, they would not object to reason. If our reason told us that the heathen could justly by born sinners, and commit sin necessarily because of an inborn sin nature, and then die in their sins without a knowledge of the Gospel, and go down into hell, they would not object to reason. If reason told us that sin, with its guilt and condemnation, could be passed on in the physical constitution of man, they would not object to reason. If reason told us that a nonmoral and non-personal entity called "flesh" could, contrary to its nature, take on personality and moral character, and be sinful, they would not object to reason. No, they object to reason only because they are conscious that the doctrine of original sin is unreasonable. In effect, the defenders of the doctrine of original sin admit that the doctrine of original sin is unreasonable. For them to say that the testimony of reason should not be admitted is a tacit admission that the necessary affirmations of their own reason testify against the doctrine of original sin. There are certain self-evident truths, direct perceptions of reason, known to be true to all men. A thing cannot both be and not be. Two contradictory things cannot both be true. The shortest distance between two points is a straight line. The whole cannot be greater than the sum of its parts. Every effect must have a cause. A creation implies a creator. Moral character is non-transferable. There are no proxies in morals. Sin cannot be imputed where it does not exist without injustice. Perfect justice cannot punish the innocent for the guilt of another. Sin is personal and non-transferable. Now all of the above truths are known intuitively. They do not need to be proved. They are direct perceptions of reason, and cannot rationally be denied by any man. But the doctrine of original sin does deny self-evident truths. It denies the self-evident truth that there can be no proxies in morals and teaches that Adam committed sin for us by proxy. It denies that moral character is non-transferable and teaches that Adam's sinful character was transferred to all his descendants! It denies that sin cannot be imputed where it does not exist without injustice and teaches that the infinitely holy and just God imputed the sin of Adam to all his descendants. It denies that perfect justice cannot punish the innocent for the guilt of another and teaches that God, who is perfect in truth and justice, condemned the whole human race for the sin of Adam. To say that the doctrine of original sin is unreasonable is a profound understatement. There really never has existed a doctrine so unreasonable, so absurd, and so ridiculous as this doctrine. It is not only absurd, it is plain superstition to believe that we sinned in Adam thousands of years before we were born and began our existence. No man can
Page 1 and 2:
Are Men Born Sinners? The Myth of O
Page 3 and 4:
Appendix A: The Nature and Attribut
Page 5 and 6:
and that he has been created with a
Page 7 and 8:
are born: "The wicked are estranged
Page 9 and 10:
We are the offspring of God. Acts 1
Page 11 and 12:
Biblical proof-texts. It is these p
Page 13 and 14:
not a substance. It has absolutely
Page 15 and 16:
flesh and of the mind." And then, s
Page 17 and 18:
Rom. 5:12-19 does not in any way te
Page 19 and 20:
This is the incredible dogma that i
Page 21 and 22: And, If in Adam human nature as a w
Page 23 and 24: e disciplined and purified. He taug
Page 25 and 26: Even the most cultured Fathers from
Page 27 and 28: They being the root of all mankind,
Page 29 and 30: 2. It means that, since we are the
Page 31 and 32: possible to make mankind miserable
Page 33 and 34: 10. The fact that men will deny the
Page 35 and 36: think of the multitudes upon multit
Page 37 and 38: Part Two: Answering the Christian's
Page 39 and 40: men are tempted through the desires
Page 41 and 42: doctrine that Christians were now d
Page 43 and 44: Christ, he points out that Levi had
Page 45 and 46: Why? doth not the son bear the iniq
Page 47 and 48: Those who heartily believe in the d
Page 49 and 50: forth good fruit; but a corrupt tre
Page 51 and 52: appealing to the false logic that "
Page 53 and 54: commanded the sun and not the earth
Page 55 and 56: Second, the doctrine of original si
Page 57 and 58: Part Three: Implications of a False
Page 59 and 60: 5. It is a stumbling-block to the u
Page 61 and 62: The Bible says that God will "judge
Page 63 and 64: heathen philosophy, and was foisted
Page 65 and 66: would lose all its force and meanin
Page 67 and 68: In 426 or 427, it was reported to A
Page 69 and 70: But again, the doctrine of inabilit
Page 71: The doctrine of a natural inability
Page 75 and 76: art Four: Insurmountable Problems o
Page 77 and 78: sinned in Adam before they were bor
Page 79 and 80: Who will have all men to be saved,
Page 81 and 82: John wrote his epistles, condemning
Page 83 and 84: No man is able...by any grace recei
Page 85 and 86: means has been born and continues t
Page 87 and 88: Return to the Index Chapter 12: God
Page 89 and 90: Is God telling lies when he makes t
Page 91 and 92: 6. See further commentary on Romans
Page 93 and 94: Finney, Charles G., Lectures on Sys
Page 95 and 96: Appendix A The Nature and Attribute
Page 97 and 98: until they have a knowledge of good
Page 99 and 100: accountability, for this they had b
Page 101 and 102: Matt. 13:38-39; John 3:8; Rev. 12:9
Page 103 and 104: summing up of all he had said befor
Page 105 and 106: "The righteousness of the law" is "
Page 107 and 108: The Bible can be used to prove the
Page 109 and 110: constitution and this mental consti
Page 111 and 112: It follows that the elect may deman
Page 113 and 114: us certain irresistible convictions
Page 115 and 116: manifestly angry; but I do not reco
Page 117 and 118: Excerpts from Charles G. Finney's L
Page 119 and 120: where only the potency comes into a
Page 121 and 122: striking and melancholy evidences o
Page 123 and 124:
this was through a degradation of t
Page 125 and 126:
12-21. This passage has been usuall
Page 127:
8. Moses Stuart, Commentary on Roma
show all

Are Men Born Sinners? - Library of Theology

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?