The "Sin Nature"

Sin is a principle at work in our
bodily members. The Greeks could
not find a word or term to
associate with; so they referred
to the flesh. Romans Ch 7 is the
best exegesis concerning the effects
and the principle of sin within us.

Rom 7:20 \t \tNow if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

Rom 7:23 \t \tBut I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.

It is obvious from the context that sin mentioned in the above 2 verses is not talking about individual acts of sin, but a principle or "law" of sin that indwells the individual and inclines them to commit acts of sin.

Did Adam and Eve have a "sin nature" before they sinned?

No?
The verse that is used to prove that is Eccl 7:29

Lo, this only have I found, that God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions.

Also Adam and Eve did not have knowledge of good and evil.

I understand the "sin nature", "flesh", "old man" to all refer to the same thing.

It is there. it is never eradicated. Whenever the Spirit dominates, the sin nature is put to death. Whenever the Spirit is weakened, the sin nature rises.

Gal 5:17

For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

you notice the language in the end of the verse is similar to that of Romans 7: 16,19,20

19For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.

but that is when the flesh dominates.
That is why Paul says in Gal 5:16

[This] I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh.

He is saying in effect, there is a remedy to not fulfilling the lust of the flesh, that remedy is to walk in the Spirit.

I hope that this post by Watchman Nee on "A Talk With Young Believers" will be helpful as many times the terms sin nature, old man, and flesh can be confusing. Yet, as it was mentioned in a previous post it would seem that these terms are one and the same.

"Before we speak of our present condition, we should first understand the kind of person we were before we believed in the Lord. After that, we will speak of our condition after we believed in the Lord. We know that we are persons made up of three parts—the spirit, the soul, and the body. The spirit is the organ with which we fellowship with God. Animals have no spirit. Hence, they can never worship God. The soul is the seat of our personality. Our will, mind, emotion, and sentiments are all functions of the soul. The body is our outward shell. Although man has become fallen, he still possesses these three parts. After man is regenerated, he still has the same three parts. When God created man, He created him with a self-consciousness; man was a living creature with consciousness. He had a spirit. Hence, he was different from other lower kinds of creatures. He had a soul. Hence, he was different from the angels of light, who are purely spirits. The center of man was his spirit; it controlled his whole being. It controlled his soul and his body. Man was living totally for God; the emotions of his soul and the demands of his body were all headed up by his spirit, and they were for glorifying God and worshipping God.

But alas, man fell! This fall did not annul any of the three elements in man. However, the order of these three elements has been upset. The condition in the garden of Eden shows us clearly that mankind rebelled against God; his love for God ceased, and he declared his independence from God. Genesis 3:6 says, "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food [this was the lust of the body, which comes first] and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired [this was the love of the emotion in the soul, which comes next] to make one wise [this was Satan's suggestion, `And ye shall be as gods, knowing' (3:5); this was the spirit rejecting God, and man satisfying the cravings of the soul and the body; this comes last]." In this way, man fell, and his spirit, soul, and body were all affected. The spirit became subject to the soul, and the soul was controlled by its many senses. The body developed many abnormal cravings and lusts, which enticed the soul. Originally the spirit took the lead. Now the body takes the lead to satisfy its lusts. In the Bible, this lust of the body is called the flesh. From this time on, man became flesh (Gen. 6:3). This flesh is now man's nature after he sinned; it is now his natural constitution. Our nature is the life principle or constitution that directs our whole being. Since the time of Adam, everyone born of woman bears this sinful nature; all of them are of the flesh. After understanding the origin of the flesh and how the flesh is just our sinful nature, we can now consider the character of this flesh. We cannot expect this flesh to improve. Human nature is hard to change. In fact, it will not change. The Lord Jesus said, "That which is born of the flesh is flesh." We should focus on the word "is." That which is born of the flesh is flesh. No matter how much a person reforms, improves, and cultivates himself, the flesh is still the flesh. No matter how much a person tries to perform charitable, benevolent acts, send relief aid, love others, or serve, he is still the flesh. Even if he can do all these things, he is still the flesh. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh." Since it is the flesh that is born, it will be the flesh that will result. No man on earth can change his flesh. Neither can God in heaven change man's flesh, that is, man's nature.

Since God saw that it was impossible to mend, improve, or change man's sinful nature, He brought in the present wonderful way of redemption. We know that the Lord Jesus died for us on the cross at Golgotha. We also know that when we believe in Him and receive Him as our Savior, we are saved. But why does God deliver us from death to life once we believe in His Son's name? If this believing does not involve an exchange in our life, which is different from a mere change, will not God be delivering a man who is still full of sin into heaven? There must surely be a profound message here.

After we have believed in the Lord Jesus, God does not leave us to walk according to the old sinful nature, that is, the flesh. He sentenced the Lord Jesus to death because He intended, on the one hand, that the Lord become sin for us, and on the other hand, that the old Adamic creation be crucified with Him, so that He could give us a new life. When we believed in the Lord Jesus as our Savior, God gave us this new life with its new nature. "Through these you might become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption which is in the world by lust" (2 Pet. 1:4). At the time we believed, He dispensed into us His own life, the life of God, with the nature of God. This nature is entirely new; it is totally different from our old sinful nature. This nature does not come from an improvement of our old nature. This mysterious transaction took place at the instant we believed in the Lord Jesus as our Savior. This is regeneration, which is to be born from above and to receive God's life and nature. This regeneration is not something that man feels. Rather, it is the work of God's Holy Spirit in our spirit, recovering our spirit's lost position and installing God's life in our spirit. "The wind blows where it wills, and you hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from and where it goes; so is everyone who is born of the Spirit" (John 3:8). All those who have genuinely believed in the Lord Jesus have the Holy Spirit working in them in this way. Those who believe only with their mouth or their head are not regenerated. All those who have believed with their heart are saved (Rom. 10:9) and are surely regenerated."

But that begs the question, what are the lusts of the flesh? Or most importantly, what is "lust"?

Our modern conception of the word "lust" is that it must be evil. In James 1:14-15 the word occurs, but that same word in James is in Phillipians 1:23 that same word is translated "desire" as in Paul desiring to be with Christ, which cannot indeed be evil. It is also translated "desire" when Christ said He "desired" to take the Passover with the disciples. (I don't have a reference off the top of my head right now, forgive me) So the word "lust" or lusts are not neccesarily or uncontrollably evil, it is when they are against the will of God that they are evil. For instance, when is hunger gluttony? When it goes beyond your needs and becomes simple desire of selfish pleasure in that food you are eating. When is wanting something evil? When you covet it, and obsess over it. The lusts of the flesh, are Biblically spoken of as evil, but where did they come from?

I would say, through much prayer and Bible study for a year on this subject alone, not from sinful nature. For I do not believe in the sinful nature. The lusts of the flesh can be simply understood, if you look deeply into the ways of the flesh and when the Bible speaks of them, they always refer to actions that the unregerate indulge in and the child of God does not. For instance "There is now therefore no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. . .So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God." (Please understand that what I mean is a Christian can sin after the sins of the flesh, but not as a lifestyle.) The lusts of the flesh, can be easily understood to be like cigarette and alcohol addictions. It is terrible and miserable the first time, but that which is awful soon becomes something that you desperately desire. The first sin that a person commits in full knowledge of what sin is, is an awful torture to their conscience, but as they go on it gets easier. . .and easier. . .and easier, until it is something they crave.

Another question, what is the old man?

I concur with your statement sir, on the remedy is to walk in the Spirit, but that is reference to true conversion. (Romans 6)

Romans 7 is a man who is under deep conviction of sin, a legalistic hypocrite who has found himself, in his self-righteous state, condemned under the law and a slave to his own sin. (hence his self-condemning langauge) But contrast that with the previous chapter, and we see two very different walks. (Please take note of that phrase "the law of sin" in 7, then read chapter 6-7:3 understand the death to sin in chapter 6 and re-examine the first three verses of chapter 7) Chapter 7 speaks of a man that is battling his old man, (Romans 7:19) But chapter 6 speaks of a man that has seen his old self crucified! (Romans 6:6-7) Logically speaking, when you fight a dead man, then you will win every time.

The sin nature:

I say this with compassion and love, but sinful nature is heresy. It was founded and propogated by the Roman Catholic Church and is one of their foundational dogmas. It was introduced to Protestantism by John Calvin who was a student of Augustine, a Catholic, and Calvin was also a Catholic before he left that denomination, but held on to that doctrine. Luther did the same thing, but he as well kept transubstanation though retitled it. (See Luther's Catechism)

Now to say that sin is a nature is to say that is must be transmitted somehow. Sin cannot be physical, for that denies it's very principle. Sin is a HEART problem (Matthew 15:16-20, James 1:14-16, Psalm 81:12, Romans 1:24) And if it were physical, then it could not break a spiritual law, (I John 3:4b) Romans 7:14) But sin is spiritual, in it's nature and function. So if sin were to be placed anywhere as a nature, then it must be in the soul, which means that God would give it to you, for God fashions you and places your soul in your body. (Psalm 119:73, Job 33:4, Zechariah 12:1, Malachi 2:10, Psalm 100:3)

Sorry to write a book about it, but I felt that God would have me post this. My prayer is that you will not simply reject it, but consider slowly these words.

For more reference on this subject, go to www.straightpathsbiblechurch.com and click on the "Articles" find the list of them and scroll to the bottom. There are ten articles on sin nature there. Also, for a wonderful and explanatory exposition of Psalm 51:5 God to www.midwaybiblebaptistchurch.com and scroll to the bottom of the page where it says "topics of interest" and click on "Original sin" Best documentation on the subject though, would be a book "ARE MEN BORN SINNERS?" By A. T. Overstreet. You can find it free online.

God bless you richly.

Pilgrim,

When you say that Adam had the flesh. Do you mean (hunk of meat), or the "invisible principle" that operates within our members. The word "flesh" in the Bible has two meanings.

The first meaning is not sinful, our Lord Jesus came in the flesh but He was sinless. The second meaning is sinful, invisible.

For example: my hand is made of flesh ( hunk of meat ). If the hand is operated by the invisible sin principle or the flesh in the negative sense, it will do the works of the flesh such as steal,hit, pull the trigger,...but if it is operated by the Spirit, it will help the needy, cook a meal to the hungry, write a kind note,...

It is the same hand or the same hunk of meat (flesh), but depending on the operating power be it the flesh ( invisible sin principle ) or the Spirit it will do the works of the flesh or the works of God.

Only thing about the book, Pilgrim, is the man does not believe in eternal security. I am unaware of your view on that, but I do not endorse that view. Just a heads-up.

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned-- for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law. Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come. But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
(Romans 5:12-21)

"Now to say that sin is a nature is to say that is must be transmitted somehow. Sin cannot be physical, for that denies it's very principle. "

There is a mix up here between the word nature and the word Physical or natural.

Everything has a nature. There is the nature ( character or attribute )of God, of love, of evil, of spirit, of faith,....or anything you can think of.

But not everything is natural, or physical

Yes indeed, I understand that. (Sorry if I was not clear upon that, my fault.) But to say that sin is a spiritually natural thing, is to say that God gave a sinful spirit. "Is Christ the minister of sin? God forbid!" I posted many Scripture references in my larger post toward the end I hope you will consider.

Well, Pilgrim, it seems we hold a similar view upon that. I concur with what you just said. However I believe that the trick is not keeping salvation, it is getting it. I do believe in Perseverance of the Saints.

Yes, sin is not placed there by God. Every human being's choice to sin and disobey God is what puts it there. The sinful habit is developed by sinning, not sinful habit devlopes sinning. God put the spirit there, the Bible clearly teaches that. I may be misunderstanding you, but God can indeed as you said divide between soul and spirit, but in the beginning of our existence there is no reason for them to be divided, they are both pure, for they are given of God. But this begs a question of it's own: if sin is there when you are born, how did it get there? It cannot be from Adam, for that would mean we are condemned for another's sin (Due 24:16 Ezekiel 18:4, 20) God does not violate His own Laws.

1. Where is the Sin Nature mentioned in the Bible? I see the Flesh mentioned in Romans, but not the Sin Nature.

Good question and discussion. Romans 8:3 says, "For what the Law could not do, weak as it was through the flesh, God did: sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and as an offering for sin, He condemned sin in the flesh"

That passage tells us that man is made up of "sinful flesh" which Christ was not made up of, only in that "likeness".
So even though it doesn't say "sinful nature" it seems to convey a similar idea.

This is one topic that has caused Charles Finney to be a controversial figure among Christians. I mention him because I lean toward his view on this topic. Finney rejected the idea that sin can be a nature. He pointed to Scriptures like 1John 3:4 which clearly state that sin is transgression of the Law, not a nature.

However he did affirm that man is born with a "corrupted" nature that causes him to be tempted to sin. To him this was the fleshly nature which the Bible speaks of. This "corrupted, twisted, or warped" nature causes man to have appetites above what is proper.

When Adam was first created, his appetites or desires for food, comfort, sex, etc were normal or acceptable in proportion. But once he sinned against God, his appetites or desires became twisted and corrupted in such a way that they were now above what is normal or acceptable. For example, instead of having an appetite for enough food to eat, he now had an appetite for more than enough food(temping him to be greedy and gluttonous). The same applied with all other areas of "bodily" desires. His fleshly, or bodily appetites were now expanded or above proper proportion, causing him to be tempted to commit sin in all areas. But that "appetite" along with the "temptation" did not constitue sin. It is only when one yields to those appetites and temptations that one sins. And this "yielding" or "sinning" begins in the mind.

So even though Finney and others do not call it a "sinful nature" they still believe in the same idea of natural corruption inherited from Adam.

Finney rejected the idea that sin can be a nature. He pointed to Scriptures like 1John 3:4 which clearly state that sin is transgression of the Law, not a nature.

Oracio,

Could you please explain further what you meant by Finney rejecting that idea that sin can be a nature.

Do you mean to say that Finney believed that "we are sinners because we sin" instead of "we sin because we are sinners"?

Madefree, you write
"But this begs a question of it's own: if sin is there when you are born, how did it get there? It cannot be from Adam, for that would mean we are condemned for another's sin"

Yet paul teaches in Romans that both sin and death do come from Adam:

"Wherefore, as by one man (Adam) sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned" Romans 5:12 (KJV)

And Judgement as well:

Therefore as by the offence of one (Adam) judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one (Christ) the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Romans 5:18-19 (KJV)

And then the remedy: not to struggle against sin, not to resist it. not praying and fasting for deliverance, but in simple faith yield yourselves to God.

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. For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: KNOWING that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise RECKON ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but YIELD yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God. For sin shall NOT have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under GRACE Romans 6:6-14 (KJV)

David

Davidc,
Amen.

We have only two options:

1) Either we are slaves to sin, or;
2) We are slaves to righteousness in Christ Jesus.

As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our flesh and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature deserving of wrath. But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:1-8)

When you study a passage like Romans 5:12-18, you realize that in the same way that condemnation and death were brought upon us because of the first Adam, justification and life are brought upon us because of the second Adam, Jesus Christ.

Because of Adam, death and condemnation came upon this cursed world. But thanks be to God, who did not leave us to perish. For when the times came to fulfillment, He sent forth His one and only Son, so that the curse might be removed and that a righteousness from above might be revealed. We who once were dead, slaves to sin and condemned already, when the grace of God appeared, we were raised up to life and seated in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus.

Praise be to His holy Name! God, the great and mighty Savior! His loving kindness is the only hope. We who were helpless, completely and radically helpless; we were rescued from the pit of destruction by the One who works all things according to the counsel of his will (Ephesians 1:11).

Just logged on and saw this topic. Not to ignore any ongoing posts (I read through most of them), but I would like to address the original question.

I think the closest thing to a "sin nature" that is mentioned in scripture is in Eph. 2:3 saying that we were by nature the children of wrath. The problem is that this term does not speak of a "thing" called a "nature". It literally means that we were "naturally the children of wrath" which means that our natural state due to being in sin was that we were subject to the wrath of God. So it has nothing to do with having a thing called a nature.

The next closest thing would be the NIV rendering of flesh (sarx) in Romans 7. Romans 7:18 is rendered as "in my sinful nature", but I think this is a perversion of scripture by translators with an a priori commitment to the idea that man has a sinful nature. The word is flesh (sarx). It occurs 150 times in the NT and is always translated "flesh" with the exception of three occurrences of "carnal" which just means "of the meat or of the flesh" like when you order chili con carne at a Mexican restaurant.

Romans 7 does not describe duality of nature and the battle between the two in the heart of a Christian. Placing it in context of Paul's teaching on Romans will show that Paul is describing the futility of trying to please God by keeping the law. The wretchedness of this futile effort is remedied in chapter 8 when Paul tells us the Jesus Christ sets us free from this bondage.

We do not struggle with two natures. We simply struggle with the flesh. Our body and our minds are not born again, our spirit is. So we can still be tempted through our flesh and our minds. Victory comes as we reckon ourselves dead indeed to sin and alive unto God. It comes as we awake to righteousness and sin not. There is not a white dog and a black dog living in me. This concept is nowhere found in scripture. It is only found in a misinterpretation of Romans 7. I have been regenerated and am now the temple of the Holy Spirit. I can walk in the spirit or in the flesh. I am servant to what I yield myself to obey.

Just my take.

I don't think Finney was coming against the idea of original sin. He was not saying man was not born into sin. He was saying that man does not have a "sin nature". Original sin was strongly taught by Finney, but the idea that original sin was due to a sin nature would make this original sin simply calamity for which the sinner could not be blamed any more than a human could be blamed for being a human.

Naatmi, you say
"sinful flesh" just means sinful humanity, not our literal flesh. Jesus was in the likeness of sinful humanity."

But Jesus was without sin, and the only man who was without sin.

And on the cross, God did something with His son. He made Him to be SIN. This is much more than His atoning work for our SINS through the shedding of His precious blood. God made Him sin, and put him to death.
Why?
It was for us, so that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him. In Him, we are made new creatures with a nature of the righteousness of God. Yes, we are made righteous through the cleansing of His blood, and this relates to our sins. But by faith in Him, our very nature is changed from sin to the righteousness of God Himself.

David

Could you please explain further what you meant by Finney rejecting that idea that sin can be a nature.

Do you mean to say that Finney believed that "we are sinners because we sin" instead of "we sin because we are sinners"?

Exactly, but he did not deny the fact that we are born with a "corrupt" nature which we inherited from Adam. He just did not call it a "sin nature" because it is unbiblical and it can easily lead sinners to justify themselves for their sins and blame God.

Romans 5:12 makes it very clear that when Adam sinned we all sinned in him and because of that we are guilty and condemned already because we sinned in Adam. Because of that guilt we inherit a corrupt nature and a perishable body as well. If we were not guilty of Adam's sin we would not even be born with perisable bodies or deformities.

Whom did Jesus say is our father before we are born from above?

"You are of your father the devil".

When Christ is birthed in the believer, the believer receives a new Father, "Our Father".

Satan is and was and always will be the sin nature that entered into the world. If Satan is our father before new birth, no one can escape the sin nature, until God puts His incorruptable Seed Jesus Christ in the Believer, then Satan no longer rules with a rod of sin, but we are by Grace through Faith saved from sin and the old has now become new. We now are no longer serving sin but serving righteousness and Light and Love in Christ, by the Christ that is in us. Sin Nature of Satan out and righteousness by justification and regeneration of Christ born again in the believer. We either have the nature of Satan or we have the Nature of, "God our Father".

Man does not have the ability to defeat sin, for Satan nature is stronger than man. Only by the Birthing do we have the ability to defeat sin, by the Christ that is in us, who is our new nature in whom we live and move and have our being.

The only free will we have is to believe a lie, or believe the truth by Grace through faith, becoming the son's of whom we believe, Satan or Jesus Christ, whom we believe by the faith of the Son of God that is given to us in rebirth, satan out, Christ in, Christ is now whom we believe, the truth unto salvation, by Grace through the Faith of the Son of God given to every believer.

Galatians 2:16-21 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid. For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God. 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. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

His Faith: Ephesians 2:1-10 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

No longer walking in accordance with the prince of the power of the air, SATAN. Now walking in the life of Christ that is in me. For "it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me". IN CHRIST: Phillip

I believe it was David who said, In sin did my mother concieve me.
It is interesting to note in Rom. 5-8 when it says "sin" that in the greek it includes the article "the" that many believe refers to a nature of sin in contrast to acts of sin. Man became depraved because they were deprived of the presence of God by their rebellion.
We are not responsible for the sin nature being there, but we are responsible for it remaining and controling us. We have no excuse.
People have tried spiritual utopia's to find that sin always found its way in. Why? Because man is sinful from the inside out. Jesus said it is from the heart that all sin comes from.
Evidence of depravity is seen in babies before they even have the capacity to sin.

JB1968, I forgot about the term "depraved" nature. Glad you brought it up. We are indeed depraved before we are born again by the Spirit. Man is not basically good or morally neutral. That is heresy and humanism. The Bible makes it abundantly clear that without regeneration man cannot obey or please God(Rom.8:7-8).

I have read Finneys Systematic Theology and he affirms that the human soul is depraved or corrupted. But he defined the issue in different terms than calvinists, so as not to give sinners any excuses whatsoever for their sins. He affirmed that there is something in all of us that causes us to be tempted to sin. So therein lied the difference. For Finney, the depraved nature caused temptation, not sin. For calvinists, the depraved nature causes sin, not just temptation.

Let God be true, though every man is a liar.

Whether you are a Jew or a Gentile, you are absolutely worthless, sinful, rebellious, and condemned apart from Christ.

What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin, as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one." "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips." "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness." "Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known." "There is no fear of God before their eyes."
(Romans 3:9-18)

Therefore, if you think you will be justified before God by “doing the right thing”, I’ve got bad news for you: You can’t do anything truly good, unless you are quickened by the Spirit of God and raised to life!

And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-- among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind. But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved--
(Ephesians 2:1-5)

You have two options:
1) Slave to sin, or;
2) Slave of righteousness in Christ.

Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.
(Romans 6:16-18)

Amen Renoncer.

"The heart is more deceitful than all else and is desperately sick; Who can understand it?"(Jeremiah 17:9)

Romans 5:12 says nothing about sinning "in" anyone. That is not even possible. The idea comes from the mistranslated Vulgate which Augustine used to justify the inherited sin nature idea.

"Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned."

"Because all sinned" is in reference to the reason why death spread to all men. We all know that death is a curse from the fall of Adam. We all know that the curse of "death" is something we are BORN with. Paul is saying that death came to Adams children(all men), because all sinned. How else can that be interpreted other than saying that when Adam sinned all sinned in him. In other words, Adam represented the human race. God knew the whole human race before he created it, and He knew the choice we would make before we made it. He knew that we would make the same choice Adam made if we were in his shoes. So instead of bringing death to each person when they actually committed the first sin, he allowed Adam's sin to be our sin because we also "made" that choice(in eternity in God's sight). We have to remember that God dwells in eternity not time.
That is also why God can predestine some to eternal life, because He knows every choice we make before we make it.

It seems to me that Romans 5:15-21 makes it abundantly clear that through Adam's sin we were all made guilty and became condemned before God:

15But the free gift is not like the transgression. For if by the transgression of the one the many died, much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many.
16The gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned; for on the one hand the judgment arose from one transgression resulting in condemnation, but on the other hand the free gift arose from many transgressions resulting in justification.
17For if by the transgression of the one, death reigned through the one, much more those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.
18So then as through one transgression there resulted condemnation to all men, even so through one act of righteousness there resulted justification of life to all men.
19For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous.
20 The Law came in so that the transgression would increase; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more,
21so that, as sin reigned in death, even so grace would reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord

naatmi, it seems you believe in open theism. we will have to agree to disagree on that one. there is no way I can believe that doctrine because there are numerous Scriptures that declare the omniscience of God. But that's a whole other topic. Maybe you can start one on that topic. Just a suggestion.

That magical verse has been brought up. Here's a good summary of it: (not written by me)

"Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me. - Psa. 51:5

Just yank this verse out of context and it looks like the issue is settled doesn't it? However, that violates every rule of interpretation by anyone's standards, and so anyone who is going to be honest is going to have to look a little closer. There are several ways to look at this, unless you have your mind already made up and don't intend to change it.

First of all, this is David's prayer of deep and thorough repentance. He sees himself as very low in the light of God's holiness. He has sinned against God and his guilt is great. He is humbling himself before God, as we all have to do. He is saying that he is just unworthy of anything from God. His best has not been anything to compare with God's holiness, and the best he has ever done now looks very worthless in view of his sin. His sin is all that is before him now and it is the great obstacle between him and God.

This is figurative language and that cannot be denied. If we take this statement and make a literal application with it, then we must also take verse 7 and apply it literally.

Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow. -Psa. 51:7

But we know that hyssop will not cleanse us from our sins - it is figurative language. The idea is that David wants to be clean from his sin. He is begging God for deliverance and forgiveness and holding forth nothing of his own merit, but putting himself as low as he possibly can. He is saying, "I've never done anything worthy of your mercy, but I'm asking anyway."

Again in verse 8 we see figurative language used:

Make me to hear joy and gladness; that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice. - Psa. 51:8

God did not literally break his bones, and bones do not rejoice. It is figurative language and in the same context as verse 5. Again it is speaking of David's low estate because of his sin and his desire to have his innermost heart pure and right with God.

Another way of looking at this to realize that he said "I was shapen IN iniquity, and IN sin did my mother conceive me…" Sin entered the world through Adam. David was born IN this world. His mother conceived him IN a sinful world and he was shapen as he grew IN the midst of a world full of iniquity. This is the way that Jewish writers of old interpreted this verse. We are all in the same boat. We were born into a world full of sin and we have been exposed to it from the day we entered the world. How can anyone imagine that it would not be a factor in our "going astray" or "becoming filthy?"

Some have put forth the idea that David was saying he was conceived when his mother committed fornication. I completely disagree with that idea. I see no evidence to even justify thinking such a thing. In my opinion it is far from a satisfying explanation for this verse.

We can also start dissecting the words in this verse and see much more than the "obvious" meaning that has filled so many textbooks and doctrinal books. "Shapen" means to "writhe or twist in pain." He says he was "shapen in iniquity." It is connected to the later part of the verse, which says, "and in sin did my mother conceive me." The word "sin" there means "a crime or its penalty." Take a look at Genesis 3:16: Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. - Gen. 3:16 Part of the result of sin entering the world through Adam and Eve is that childbirth is painful. David is saying that he entered the world in the midst of writhing and pain and it was because of the fact that sin had entered the world long ago. We surely see the effects and results of sin everywhere, but that doesn't mean that it is physically transmitted from generation to generation. It is a moral problem - not a physical problem. Sin has definitely affected the entire creation, but INFLUENCE is the way sin is spread - it hasn't done so by physically transmitting itself from one being to another.

Of course, Augustine, the father of this doctrine of devils, believed this verse to say that the union of David's parents in which he was conceived was sinful in itself. Augustine believed that intimacy between a man and woman was sinful because it involved lust. The fact that they were married made no difference, as far as he was concerned. He believed that sin was transmitted to the child because of the lust that was involved in the intimacy between husband and wife. Never mind that it is a natural desire given by God and also blessed by God inside a marriage relationship.

Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. - Heb. 13:4

Of course, when you look at a verse with your mind already made up you just don't think about all those other verses that contradict your private interpretation.

So you see that there are other interpretations for Psalm 51:5, and they also fit much better with the rest of the Bible and its teaching on sin."

- Taken from "Are We Born Sinners" series of articles.

Here's another from the same article on that recurring passage:

"For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. - Rom. 5:19

In the first place, if we are going to be consistent then we must say that if Adam MADE ALL men sinners then Jesus MADE ALL men righteous. You cannot change your interpretation between two identical phrases in the same verse. The Universalists use the doctrine of original sin to prove that all men are going to heaven. If you believe in original sin then you have no grounds on which to argue with them - they win the debate. The word used here is not ALL, but MANY. This verse is speaking of the INFLUENCE of Adam - not what he physically passed to his descendents. We are not trying to lessen the significance of Adam's sin because it surely did bring sin into the world. It was the beginning of every heartache and misery that has been experienced by men since that day, not to mention all the death. However, the doctrine of original sin is a terrible distortion and misrepresentation of what really happened.

For example, we could say that Hugh Hefner of Playboy magazine has made many men immoral, adulterers, and perverts. That is certainly true, but we don't think of the sins of Hugh Hefner being imputed to others! That would be a ridiculous twist of reason! We could say that all the devil-possessed rock musicians of our day have ruined multitudes of people with their music and their message of drugs and rebellion. That would be true, but we would not think of them being ruined in the sense that the rock singers' sins were imputed to them by some physical means. Again, we might see a family where the father was a drunkard and all his sons were drunkards, too. We would say that father made drunkards out of his boys with his drinking, and that would be true. But you would never think that the father somehow passed that to his children physically. We understand that it was his INFLUENCE that caused his boys to be drunkards also. We have sense enough to understand these things correctly but when it comes to the Word of God we put a twist on it that doesn't fit with reason, or with the rest of the Scripture.

Along that same line of reasoning, we all have known wicked fathers who had sons who were righteous. The Bible is also full of examples like that. Likewise, we have seen righteous men who have had wicked sons. It is the INFLUENCE - NOT THE GENES! It is whether or not they submit their heart to God and his law or rebel against it. EVERY person must choose for themselves - and they DO!"

Again, not written by me. But that is what I believe about it.

Just as Adam sinned and was condemned as a result of his own sin, likewise all men were condemned as a result of their own sins.

"For as through the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, even so through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous."(Rom.5:19)

I don't see how we can get away from the clear, plain reading and meaning of that verse. It clearly states that through Adam's sin we were all made guilty sinners.

I understand your point about man being accountable for his own sin and not his parents sin, and I agree. That is why I cannot see any other way of reconciling that truth with the Romans 5 passages other than the way I explained it.

@naatmi

Adam was created mortal. Adam died because he did not have access to the tree of life.

Mortality is not a curse. Jesus became a mortal man just like we are mortal. Jesus did not have access to the tree of life just we don't have access. Just as Jesus was not being punished for his ancestor's sin, neither are we. Just as it was not a punishment for Jesus to be mortal, neither is our mortality a punishment

Romans 6:23 clearly declares that the wages/penalty/punishment for sin is death. And Romans 5:12, the verse we just looked at also declares this truth. So I'm curious to know how you interpret those verses.

@naatmi
The second commentary you quote seems to give two possible interpretations of Romans 5:12-19 regarding Adam's sin and our relation to it. Out of those two possibilities this is the one I agree with, which Finney also believed:

It can also be argued that because of Adam’s fall, all of his descendants inherit physical depravity which inclines them, influences them, and tempts them to sin, and in this way does Adam “make” us sinners, though we voluntarily choose to obey those inclinations, influences, and temptations by our own free will.

So I may not agree with Finney's views regarding the issue of "imputed guilt" but I do lean toward his view of human depravity or corruption.

BTW could you give the names of the authors of those commentaries? Just curious to see if I know of any of them.

UB said

I understand the "sin nature", "flesh", "old man" to all refer to the same thing.

I agree......... and it the thorn in the flesh that is the messenger of satan

Sin is not just a verb but is a noun that adheres unto the law of the seed and brings forth a verb in its image

Evil became sin and it lives in all of humankind....... then someone somewhere called it a "sin nature" that is not mentioned in the Bible but nevertheless is very true

Blessings

Doug

Jesse Morrell is an admitted Pelagianist. Here is an explanation of Pelagianism from Theopedia:

Pelagianism views humanity as basically good and morally unaffected by the Fall. It denies the imputation of Adam's sin, original sin, total depravity, and substitutionary atonement. It simultaneously views man as fundamentally good and in possession of libertarian free will. With regards to salvation, it teaches that man has the ability in and of himself (apart from divine aid) to obey God and earn eternal salvation. Pelagianism is overwhelmingly incompatible with the Bible and was historically opposed by Augustine (354-430), Bishop of Hippo, leading to its condemnation as a heresy at Council of Carthage in 418 A.D. These condemnations were summarily ratified at the Council of Ephesus (A.D. 431).

Nearly all Pelagianists greatly admire fellow Pelagianist Charles Finney. Most people can admire Finney for preaching repentance and holiness but when it comes to the atonement, Christ being our substitutionary sacrifice, and the imputed righteousness of the believer, Finney's theology was gravely in error. Finney did not believe that Christ died and paid for our sins. Rather, he taught that God poured out His wrath on His Son in order to show us the seriousness of sin. If you want to read up on Finney and all of his heresies, go here:

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/finney.htm

Question to naatmi: Are you Jesse Morrell? If not, you can simply say: Not Me

Just to clarify something about Finney, I am posting a short clip from an article titled " How to Win Souls "

quote from Finney.

"1st. They are free moral agents, of course rational, accountable.

2nd. They are in rebellion against God, wholly alienated, intensely prejudiced, and committed against Him."

Finney believed that man has the ability to repent and believe the gospel bacause he is a free moral agent, able to make choices, but man is also depraved and does not desire God.

That means, man is able to choose God but he does not want or desire to.

The main stream in Finney's time believed that man in unable to choose God.

For more clarification about Finney's views on depravity, go here www.gospeltruth.net His Systematic Theology is on here. (highly recommended reading.) Also, I have read the article on Phil Johnson's website and since he is a well-known and proud of it Calvinist, he would naturally be against Finney's views. If you want to know what Finney believed, read HIS writings and not someone commenting on him. His complete works are at the above mentioned site.

I read Finney's Total Depravity sermon found here:
http://www.gospeltruth.net/1836SOIS/04sois_total_depravity.htm

What is particularly striking is that he does not quote even one scripture verse. These are the words of Charles Finney but not the word of God.

[edit] He has one scripture at the top of this sermon but it is not used to support his arguments.

Read his Systematic Theology on this subject. I think he put Scripture there. He also assumed it to be a self-evident truth with his audience to whom he was writing. They knew him pretty well.

If you want a lot of Scripture, look in "Other Authors" link on that site and find "Over 100 Texts that Prove Babies are Born Innocent" by A. T. Overstreet. Availible on the same site.

P. S. Has anyone posted Albert Barnes yet?

That was actually a translator error. The word "sarx" is supposed to be translated "flesh" but for some reason the translators made a doctrinal assumption. There is an article on that as well on www.gospeltruth.net "The Scandal of the NIV"

Good question though, that's pretty funny.

You know what, that's right. Wescott and Hort who were responsible for finding that text from which the NIV was translated were members of the London's Club of Hermes, a santanist group that is still active today.

Here's some Albert Barnes, he was a new-schooler like Finney:

THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS - Chapter 5 - Verse 12
Verses 12-21. This passage has been usually regarded as the most difficult part of the New
Testament. It is not the design of these Notes to enter into a minute criticism of contested points
like this. They who wish to see a full discussion of the passage, may find it in the professedly critical
commentaries; and especially in the commentaries of Tholuck and of Professor Stuart on the
Romans. The meaning of the passage in its general bearing is not difficult; and probably the whole
passage would have been found far less difficult if it had not been attached to a philosophical theory
on the subject of man's sin, and if a strenuous and indefatigable effort had not been made to prove
that it teaches what it was never designed to teach. The plain and obvious design of the passage is
this— to show one of the benefits of the doctrine of justification by faith. The apostle had shown
(1.) that that doctrine produced peace, Ro 5:1
(2.) That it produces joy in the prospect of future glory, Ro 5:2
(3.) That it sustained the soul in afflictions;
(a) by the regular tendency of afflictions under the gospel,
Ro 5:3,4; and
(b) by the fact that the Holy Ghost was imparted to the believer.
(4.) That this doctrine rendered it certain that we should be saved, because Christ had died for
us, Ro 5:6; because this was the highest expression of love, Ro 5:7,8; and because, if we had been
reconciled when thus alienated, we should be saved now that we are the friends of God, Ro 5:9,10.
(5.) That it led us to rejoice in God himself; produced joy in his presence, and in all his attributes.
He now proceeds to show the bearing on that great mass of evil which had been introduced into
the world by sin, and to prove that the benefits of the atonement were far greater than the evils
which had been introduced by the acknowledged effects of the sin of Adam. "The design is to exalt
our views of the work of Christ, and of the plan of justification through him, by comparing them
with the evil consequences of the sin of our first father, and by showing that the blessings in question
not only extend to the removal of these evils, but far beyond this; so that the grace of the gospel
has not only abounded, but superabounded." (Prof. Stuart.) In doing this the apostle admits, as an
undoubted and well understood fact,
1. That sin came into the world by one man, and death as the consequence, Ro 5:12.
2. That death had passed on all; even on those who had not the light of revelation, and the
express commands of God, Ro 5:13,14.
3. That Adam was the figure, the type of him that was to come; that there was some sort of
analogy or resemblance between the results of his act, and the results of the work of Christ. That
analogy consisted in the fact that the effects of his doings did not terminate on himself, but extended
to numberless other persons, and that it was thus with the work of Christ, Ro 5:14. But he shows,
4. That there were very material and important differences in the two cases. There was not a
perfect parallelism. The effects of the work of Christ were far more than simply to counteract the
evil introduced by the sin of Adam. The differences between the effect of his act and the work of
Christ are these:
(1.) The sin of Adam led to condemnation. The work of Christ has
an opposite tendency, Ro 5:15.
(2.) The condemnation which came from the sin of Adam was the
result of one offence. The work of Christ was to deliver from
many offences, Ro 5:16.
(3.)The work of Christ was far more abundant and overflowing in
its influence. It extended deeper and farther. It was more than
a compensation for the evils of the fall, Ro 5:17.
5. As the act of Adam threw its influence over all men to secure their condemnation, so the
work of Christ was fitted to affect all men, Jews and Gentiles, in bringing them into a state by which
they might be delivered from the fall, and restored to the favour of God. It was in itself adapted to
produce far more and greater benefits than the crime of Adam had clone evil; and was thus a glorious
plan, just fitted to meet the actual condition of a world of sin; and to repair the evils which apostasy
had introduced. It had thus the evidence that it originated in the benevolence of God, and that it
was adapted to the human condition, Ro 5:18-21.
Verse 12. Wherefore. (dia touto). On this account. This is not an inference from what has gone
before, but a continuance of the design of the apostle to show the advantages of the plan of
justification by faith; as if he had said, "The advantages of that plan have been seen in our comfort
and peace, and in its sustaining power in afflictions. Further, the advantages of the plan are seen
in regard to this, that it is applicable to the condition of man in a world where the sin of one man
has produced so much woe and death. On this account also it is a matter of joy. It meets the ills of
a fallen race; and it is therefore a plan adapted to man." Thus understood, the connexion and design
of the passage is easily explained. In respect to the state of things into which man is fallen, the
benefits of this plan may be seen, as adapted to heal the maladies, and to be commensurate with
the evils which the apostasy of one man brought upon the world. This explanation is not that which
is usually given to this place, but it is that which seems to me to be demanded by the strain of the
apostle's reasoning. The passage is elliptical, and there is a necessity of supplying something to
make out the sense.
As. (wsper). This is the form of a comparison. But the other part of the comparison is deferred
to Ro 5:18. The connexion evidently requires us to understand the other part of the comparison of
the work of Christ. In the rapid train of ideas in the mind of the apostle, this was deferred to make
room for explanations, (Ro 5:13-17.) "As by one man sin entered into the world, etc., so by the
work of Christ a remedy has been provided, commensurate with the evils. As the sin of one man
had such an influence, so the work of the Redeemer has an influence to meet and to counteract
those evils." The passage in Ro 5:13-17 is therefore to be regarded as a parenthesis thrown in for
the purpose of making explanations, and to show how the cases of Adam and of Christ differed
from each other.
By one man, etc. By means of one man; by the crime of one man. His act was the occasion of
the introduction of all sin into all the world. The apostle here refers to the well-known historical
fact, (Ge 3:6,7) without any explanation of the mode or cause of this. He adduced it as a fact that
was well known; and evidently meant to speak of it not for the purpose of explaining the mode, or
even of making this the leading or prominent topic in the discussion. His main design is not to
speak of the manner of the introduction of sin, but to show that the work of Christ meets and removes
well-known and extensive evils. His explanations, therefore, are chiefly confined to the work of
Christ. He speaks of the introduction, the spread, and the effects of sin, not as having any theory
to defend on that subject, not as designing to enter into a minute description of the case, but as it
was manifest on the face of things, as it stood on the historical record, and as it was understood and
admitted by mankind. Great perplexity has been introduced by forgetting the scope of the apostle's
argument here, and by supposing that he was defending a peculiar theory on the subject of the
introduction of sin; whereas nothing is more foreign to his design. He is showing how the plan of
justification meets well-understood and acknowledged universal evils. Those evils he refers to just
as they were seen, and admitted to exist. All men see them, and feel them, and practically understand
them. The truth is, that the doctrine of the fall of man, and the prevalence of sin and death, do not
belong peculiarly to Christianity, any more than the introduction and spread of disease does to the
science of the healing art. Christianity did not introduce sin; nor is it responsible for it. The existence
of sin and woe belongs to the race; appertains equally to all systems of religion, and is a part of
the melancholy history of man, whether Christianity be true or false. The existence and extent of
sin and death are not affected if the infidel could show that Christianity was an imposition. They
would still remain. The Christian religion is just one mode of proposing a remedy for well-known and
desolating evils; just as the science of medicine proposes a remedy for diseases which it did
not introduce, and which could not be stayed in their desolations, or modified, if it could be shown
that the whole science of healing was pretension and quackery. Keeping this design of the apostle
in view, therefore, and remembering that he is not defending or stating a theory about the introduction
of sin, but that he is explaining the way in which the work of Christ delivers from a deep-felt
universal evil, we shall find the explanation of this passage disencumbered of many of the difficulties
with which it has been thought usually to be invested.
By one man. By Adam. See Ro 5:14. It is true that sin was literally introduced by Eve, who was
first in the transgression, Ge 3:6 1Ti 2:14. But the apostle evidently is not explaining the precise
mode in which sin was introduced, or making this his leading point. He therefore speaks of the
introduction of sin in a popular sense, as it was generally understood. The following reasons may
be suggested why the man is mentioned, rather than the woman, as the cause of the introduction
of sin.
(1.) It was the natural and usual way of expressing such an event. We say that man sinned, that
man is redeemed, man dies, etc. We do not pause to indicate the sex in such expressions. So in this,
he undoubtedly meant to say that it was introduced by the parentage of the human race.
(2.) The name Adam, in Scripture, was given to the created pair, the parents of the human
family, a name designating their earthly origin. Ge 5:1,2, "In the day that God created man, in the
likeness of God made he him; male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called
THEIR name Adam." The name Adam, therefore, used in this connexion, (Ro 5:14,) would suggest
the united parentage of the human family.
(3.) In transactions where man and woman are mutually concerned, it is usual to speak of the
man first, on account of his being constituted superior in rank and authority.
(4.) The comparison on the one side, in the apostle's argument, is of the man Christ Jesus; and
to secure the fitness, the congruity (Stuart) of the comparison, he speaks of the man only in the
previous transaction.
(5.) The sin of the woman was not complete in its effects without the concurrence of the man.
It was their uniting in it which was the cause of the evil. Hence the man is especially mentioned as
having rendered the offence what it was; as having completed it, and entailed its curses on the race.
From these remarks it is clear that the apostle does not refer to the man here from any idea that
there was any particular covenant transaction with him, but that he means to speak of it in the usual,
popular sense; referring to him as being the fountain of all the woes that sin has introduced into the
world.
Sin entered into the world. He was the first sinner of the race. The word sin here evidently
means the violation of the law of God. He was the first sinner among men, and in consequence all
others became sinners. The apostle does not here refer to Satan, the tempter, though he was the
suggester of evil; for his design was to discuss the effect of the plan of salvation in meeting the
sins and calamities of our race. This design, therefore, did not require him to introduce the sin of
another order of beings, he says, therefore, that Adam was the first sinner of the race, and that
death was the consequence.
Into the world. Among mankind, Joh 1:10 3:16,17.
The term world is often thus used to denote human beings—the race, the human family. The
apostle here evidently is not discussing the doctrine of original sin; but he is stating a simple fact,
intelligible to all: "The first man violated the law of God, and in this way sin was introduced among
men." In this fact—this general, simple declaration—there is no mystery.
And death by sin. Death was the consequence of sin; or was introduced because man sinned.
This is a simple statement of an obvious and well-known fact. It is repeating simply what is said
in Ge 3:19, "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out
of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." The threatening was, (Ge
2:17,) "Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it, for in the day that
thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." If an inquiry be made here, how Adam would understand
this, I reply, that we have no reason to think he would understand it as referring to anything more
than the loss of life as an expression of the displeasure of God, Moses does not intimate that he
was learned in the nature of laws and penalties; and his narrative would lead us to suppose that this
was all that would occur to Adam. And indeed there is the highest evidence that the case admits
of, that this was his understanding of it. For in the account of the infliction of the penalty after the
law was violated, in God's own interpretation of it, in Ge 3:19, there is still no reference to anything
further. "Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return." Now, it is incredible that Adam should
have understood this as referring to what has been called "spiritual death," and to "eternal death,"
when neither in the threatening, nor in the account of the infliction of the sentence, is there the
slightest recorded reference to it. Men have done great injury in the cause of correct interpretation
by carrying their notions of doctrinal subjects to the explanation of words and phrases in the Old
Testament. They have usually described Adam as endowed with all the refinement, and possessed
of all the knowledge, and adorned with all the metaphysical acumen and subtility of a modem
theologian. They have deemed him qualified, in the very infancy of the world, to understand and
discuss questions which, under all the light of the Christian revelation, still perplex and embarrass
the human mind. After these accounts of the endowments of Adam, which occupy so large a space
in books of theology, one is surprised, on opening the Bible, to find how unlike all this is the simple
statement in Genesis. And the wonder cannot be suppressed that men should describe the obvious
infancy of the race as superior to its highest advancement; or that the first man, just looking upon
a world of wonders, imperfectly acquainted with law, and moral relations, and the effects of
transgression, should be represented as endowed with knowledge which, four thousand years after,
it required the advent of the Son of God to communicate! The account in Moses is simple. Created
man was told not to violate a simple law, on pain of death. He did it; and God announced to him
that the sentence would be inflicted, and that he should return to the dust whence he was taken.
What else this might involve—what other consequences sin might introduce, might be the subject
of future developments and revelations. It is absurd to suppose that all the consequences of the
violation of a law can be foreseen, or must necessarily be foreseen, in order to make the law and
the penalty just. It is sufficient that the law be known; that its violation be forbidden; and what the
consequences of that violation will be, must be left in great part to future developments. Even we
yet know not half the results of violating the law of God. The murderer knows not the results fully
of taking a man's life: he breaks a just law, and exposes himself to the numberless unseen woes
which may flow from it.
We may ask, therefore, what light subsequent revelations have cast on the character and result
of the first sin? and whether the apostle here meant to state that the consequences of sin were in
fact as limited as they must have appeared to the mind of Adam? or had subsequent developments
and revelations, through four thousand years, greatly extended the right understanding of the penalty of
the law? This can be answered only by inquiring in what sense the apostle Paul here uses the
word death. The passage before us shows in what sense he intended here to use the word. In his
argument it stands opposed to "the grace of God, and the gift by grace," (Ro 5:15) to "justification,"
by the forgiveness of "many offences," (Ro 5:16) to the reign of the redeemed in eternal life, (Ro
5:17) and to "justification of life," (Ro 5:18.) To all these, the words "death," (Ro 5:12,17) and
"judgment," (ro 5:16,18) stand opposed. These are the benefits which result from the work of Christ;
and these benefits stand opposed to the evils which sin has introduced; and as it cannot be supposed
that these benefits relate to temporal life, or solely to the resurrection of the body, so it cannot be
that the evils involved in the words "death," "judgment," etc., relate simply to temporal death. The
evident meaning is, that the word "death," as here used by the apostle, refers to the train of evils
which have been introduced by sin. It does not mean simply temporal death; but that group and
collection of woes, including temporal death, condemnation, and exposure to eternal death, which
is the consequence of transgression. The apostle often uses the word death, and to die, in this wide
sense, Ro 1:32 6:16, 7:5,10,13,24 8:2,6,13; 2Co 2:16 7:10; Heb 2:14.
In the same sense the word is often used elsewhere, Joh 8:51 11:26; 1Jo 5:16,17; Re 2:11 20:6,
etc. etc. In contrasting with this the results of the work of Christ, he describes not the resurrection
merely, nor deliverance from temporal death, but eternal life in heaven; and it therefore follows
that he here intends by death that gloomy and sad train of woes which sin has introduced into the
world. The consequences of sin are, besides, elsewhere specified to be far more than temporal
death, Eze 18:4 Ro 2:8,9,12.
Though, therefore, Adam might not have foreseen all the evils which were to come upon the
race as the consequence of his sin, yet these evils might nevertheless follow. And the apostle, four
thousand years after the reign of sin had commenced, and under the guidance of inspiration, had
full opportunity to see and describe that train of woes which he comprehends under the name of
death. That train included evidently temporal death, condemnation for sin, remorse of conscience,
and exposure to eternal death, as the penalty of transgression.
And so. Thus. In this way it is to be accounted for that death has passed upon all men; to wit,
because all men have sinned. As death followed sin in the first transgression, so it has in all; for
all have sinned. There is a connexion between death and sin which existed in the case of Adam,
and which subsists in regard to all who sin, And as all have sinned, so death has passed on all men.
Death passed upon. (dihlyen). Passed through; pervaded; spread over the whole race, as
pestilence passes through, or pervades a nation. Thus death, with its train of woes, with its withering
and blighting influence, has passed through the world, laying prostrate all before it.
Upon all men. Upon the race; all die.
For that (ef w). This expression has been greatly controverted; and has been very variously
translated. Elsner renders it, "on account of whom." Doddridge, "unto which all have sinned." The
Latin Vulgate renders it, "in whom [Adam] all have sinned." The same rendering has been given
by Augustine, Beza, etc. But it has never yet been shown that our translators have rendered the
expression improperly. The old Syriac and the Arabic agree with the English translation fix this
interpretation. With this agree Calvin, Vatablus, Erasmus, etc. And this rendering is sustained also
by many other considerations.
(1.) If (w) be a relative pronoun here, it would refer naturally to death, as its antecedent, and
not to man. But this would not make sense.
(2.) If this had been its meaning, the preposition (en) would have been used. See Note of Erasmus
on the place.
(3.) It comports with the apostle's argument to state a cause why all died, and not to state that
men sinned in Adam. He was inquiring into the cause why death was in the world; and it would
not account for that to say that all sinned in Adam. It would require an additional statement to see
how that could be a cause.
(4.) As his posterity had not then an existence, they could not commit actual transgression. Sin
is the transgression of the law by a moral agent; and as the interpretation "because all have sinned"
meets the argument of the apostle, and as the Greek favours that certainly as much as it does the
other, it is to be preferred.
All have sinned. To sin is to transgress the law of God; to do wrong. The apostle in this expression
does not say that all have sinned in Adam, or that their nature has become corrupt, which is true,
but which is not affirmed here; nor that the sin of Adam is imputed to them; but simply affirms that
all men have sinned. He speaks evidently of the great universal fact that all men are sinners. He is
not settling a metaphysical difficulty; nor does he speak of the condition of man as he comes into
the world. He speaks as other men would; he addresses himself to the common sense of the world;
and is discoursing of universal, well-known facts. Here is the fact—that all men experience calamity,
condemnation, death. How is this to be accounted for? The answer is, "All have sinned." This is a
sufficient answer; it meets the case. And as his design cannot be shown to be to discuss a
metaphysical question about the nature of man, or about the character of infants, the passage should
be interpreted according to his design, and should not be pressed to bear on that of which he says
nothing, and to which the passage evidently has no reference. I understand it, therefore, as referring
to the fact that men sin in their own persons, sin themselves—as, indeed, how can they sin in any
other way?—and that therefore they die. If men maintain that it refers to any metaphysical properties
of the nature of man, or to infants, they should not infer or suppose this, but should show distinctly
that it is in the text. Where is there evidence of any such reference?
{s} "as by one man" Ge 3:6,19.

AMEN!

"God is not the author of confusion" Isn't it confusing with all of these translations? Ask a new convert to go into a bookstore and buy a Bible, how will he know what to do?

Quote: I don't think Finney was coming against the idea of original sin. ... Original sin was strongly taught by Finney ... Have you read Finney's Systematic Theology?

Not in its entirety. Maybe I should rephrase. From some rather lengthy quotes I have gleaned that he did not reject the idea that man was born in sin due to Adam's fall. He rejected the idea that man was born with a "sin nature". That was my understanding of what he was saying.

The main stream in Finney's time believed that man in unable to choose God.

True! I am not making this statement to start or to promulgate any sort of Calv/Arm debate or discussion, but this mainstream belief is orthodox Calvanism, which Finney very strongly opposed.

What do you think of this from the NIV? I think it is weird. 1 Cor 5:4-5 4When you are assembled in the name of our Lord Jesus and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord. Satan can destroy our sinful nature??? Why would he want to do that?

Again, the word (sarx) being redefined as "sinful nature" when it really simply means "flesh". I don't have a lot against the NIV, but this redefinition of terms bothers me a little bit.

And why would Satan want to destroy a person's sinful nature? Satan is the author of sin.

Sir, If you get the time, I posted a link to a website that puts all of Finney's works online. You can order a copy of his Systematic Theology from them for $15. (Way cheaper than other copies I've looked at.) It is recomended that you read his entire book though, he very clearly rejected original sin and the sin nature.

Here's the link again: www.gospeltruth.net

I've only been away one day, and there are 8 pages of posting to catch up. Can I go back to Anonymous who replied to my posting about Jesus being made sin for us:

" For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." 2 Cor 5:21 (KJV)

Anonymous, You say:

"Sin is a choice (intention, goal, etc)". This is the basis of your belief in this posting.

then you continue:

"Jesus being without sin means that Jesus did not choose sin." This is a logical extension of your belief.

then:

"Since sin is a choice, Jesus was not literally "made sin". It is a figurative phrase. Jesus didn't turn into a choice. It represents the fact that Jesus suffered for our sins when we are the one's who deserve to suffer for them. He offered up his life on account of our sins in order to justify pardon being granted to those who repent."

And so you make the word of God of none effect by your belief. If the plain statement that "God has made Christ to be sin" does not fit into your belief system, you call it a figurative phrase. You say it represents something which it plainly does not. You should abandon your belief system of sin being a choice and believe what God says.

Jesus himself knew what would come upon Him on the cross, and He deliberately chose the Father's will, not his own will. This is what free will is, and only Christ had the authority to exercise it.

David

I have some slightly different thoughts on Roman 7, but maybe compatible with what you think.

Actually no, I don't think what you said is compatible with what I was saying. I don't believe Paul is personifying anything. He is describing the wretchedness of attempting to live righteously by his own effort. Remember chapter 6 is dealing with our being dead to sin and no longer living therein. Paul shows the relationship between the law and sin and the fact that until he was dead to the law and alive in Christ, his attempts at being righteous through the weakness of his own flesh were futile. It was a wretched state to live in. Knowing the law of God, wanting to be righteous, and not finding it possible. He was only delivered from this wretchedness through Jesus Christ with whom Paul had considered himself crucified. 6,7,8 must be taken as a whole in the context of the remainder of the letter. You are right, the law was not the bad guy. It was just the vehicle by which sin came alive and we died to our own self righteousness. The law was good and holy, but it was never meant to be the thing that we keep in order to be in right relationship with God. It was a ministration of death to us, all of it, even the ten commandments. The law was only a shadow of the holiness of God.

the point:

again, Repentance is the issue and always has been. Adam and Eve were given everything in the Garden. They could have continued under God's provision and not missed anything. Our God was holding nothing good back from them.

But the temptation came and they took it.

The temptation was to go their own way for provision.

You guys (and girls), IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME TODAY!
We choose to not repent of providing for self. We choose to provide our own righteousness at times, our own sanctification and even glorification etc... all through means other than God's Prescribed order. Adam and Eve chose not to repent of self provision. They thought they were missing out/ God was holding back/ they could get more in their own way. That's how we do... until we 'change our mind' which is to repent. And let God provide.

John the Baptizer arrived on scene and told everyone to Repent because the Kingdom was now HERE. He did not mean in sackcloth and ashes or the Lord-ah whould stompeth you-ah!

not at all.

He was saying to change your mind about how to be in right standing with God as the Door has now come to us and is standing right in front of us. He was simply stating that the Sacrifice for the whole world has now come and that we no longer have to follow this way of Law and Commandments under condemnation of old wine skin sacrificial systems.

Jesus said he was the greatest prophet to ever live. They all pointed to the Messiah and what He would do. If John the baptizer would have been doing the same thing as the pharisees, He would not have called him that.

John was giving the picture of what Jesus had come to do - water baptism... we are buried in Christ and Risen New w/ Him and seated (by Faith) next to the Father.

Jesus Himself made it clear that John's message was exactly right. Jesus said the same thing as John, like what? A Chapter later! And we know Jesus certainly did not come to make everyone feel condemned by keeping them under obligation to the Law! He came to keep it for us! Who was the law made for again? Not the Jews!

John's demeanor was not of a mean religious spirit. He understood the way of Grace and Mercy. Through Grace and Mercy (new Cov't) we repent of our old way of living and live into Christ and through Him. Possible all because of what He did for us at the Cross.

So biblical temptation is nothing more than to leave God's ability to provide and to go another way-

We are to -repent- of providing for self. Adam did not stay repented but chose his own way.

What is our answer? Repent and Believe by Faith.

I think the 'SN' referred to is that inward bent that is in all of us to do evil. Think it's not there?

Put two three year old babies in the same play pen with one rubber ducky. See what happens. You DID NOT teach them to do that - it's IN them.

And it is still in us ever AFTER we are Saved by Faith.

That's why our Father did the Plan that way which totally by-passes our ability and obligation to 'hold up our end' of the deal. He kept all the law to give us a Perfect Righteousness... that we would not have to 'complete.' We keep it today by simple Faith in the Cross of Christ.

Really?

Think about how the two or three year olds you used in your demonstration have been raised up to that point.

They need to be fed: they cry = satisfaction.
They need emotional comfort: they cry = satisfaction
They need a diaper change: they cry = satisfaction.
They need anything: they cry = satisfaction.

What have they been taught their whole life by those who raised them? They have been taught that it's all about SELF! Not only that, they have been taught by those whom have raised them and who care for them to fend for themselves no matter what. This is what has been interestingly titled, the "I" Principle. And with conversion, "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."

I guess it is in them, but they were not born with it.

AH! I thought I'd be in this all by myself!

That's exactly right!

We come out of the womb even screaming for attention! Yes indeed!

then we're told 'do this, don't do that' stand up, sit down... and all other manner of learning how to play church and be 'independent' all on our own.

That's why it's only revealed By the Spirit, who Jesus is.

flesh (carnality) cannot as in it is impossible to receive the Kingdom into itself. But God found a Way! Amen!

IF SIN WERE A SINFUL NATURE,
THEN:

by Dennnis Carroll

1. God originated SIN

2. God will punish those who have been punished for Adam's sin, because they have been punished for Adam's sin.

3. Jesus could have married a virgin and produced a holy race by natural generation

4. Man is more benevolent and just than GOD

i.e. man's idea of justice is injustice, and that of injustice is just
5. All human governments are inherently evil, for inability is never punished, and natural attributes are not considered evil.

6. The physical change that happened at the fall removed the sinner from the obligation to obey the moral law, for the moral law addresses only those able to obey it.

7. A physical change is necessary in regeneration.

8. If a physical change occurs, then a loss of identity occurs,

however, Paul was always Paul.
9. God saving man from sin would be a matter of justice and not grace

10. God would be obligated, by justice, to relieve the unfortunate, rather than be gracious to the rebel.

11. Jesus did not become Man, with a sinful nature:

Therefore, he was not tempted in all points like as we are, nor touched with the feelings of our infirmities.
12. The will is not free.

13. How could Adam and Eve Sin?

14. How could angels sin?

15. Children go to hell.

16. All aborted babies go to hell.

17. Sin is a calamity, not a crime

18, Repentance is impossible, because the conscience will never condemn the sinner of his inability.

19. Immediate repentance and submission cannot be urged immediately upon the sinner. Because He CAN"T.

20. Man is unable to repent.

21. Physical regeneration is necessary

This leads to universalism: FOR-

If Power changes one's nature in regeneration
If God is all powerful

If God is benevolent,

HE must therefore, in justice, regenerate all sinners

22. It regards the atonement of Christ as unnecessary. he did not have to die for the misfortune of men.

Pilgrim, you write

I have never read where the Spirit leads us to put to death the "sin nature", but rather the "deeds of the flesh".

What do you think?

I think you are right, because the sin nature was put to death in Christ - He was made sin for us. On our part we have to reckon ourselves dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ.

David

Madefree
At last you come to the point. Point 11 IF SIN WERE A SINFUL NATURE, THEN: by Dennnis Carroll

11. Jesus did not become Man, with a sinful nature: Therefore, he was not tempted in all points like as we are, nor touched with the feelings of our infirmities.

And this is where your heresy lies, which grows into the false doctrine you believe and teach.

Jesus was born of a virgin, by the power of the Holy Spirt. He was on this earth perfect man and perfect God. He was without sin, had no sinful nature and committed no sins. He lived a perfect holy life on this earth, and in obedience to His Father, laid down that life for us.

How can you believe that Jesus had a sinful nature? Please explain

David

Ok, that was unclear from me. First, I did not write the article, and second remember the title is the point
"IF Sin were a sinful nature" the article is based upon the fact that there is no sinful nature at all, and the points are founded upon a hypothetical situation. The point to that was IF. Because, if all men have a sinful nature, and Jesus became a man then either: A. He was not completely human and His life was not supernatural at all. Or B. He had the supposed "sin nature."

Just a disclaimer on my part, I do not believe in the sinful nature, nor any forms of the doctrine of Original Sin. I do not teach these and believe them to be theological fiction created by men with full heads of philosophy and hearts empty of God. Men who believe it may be saved, but the creators of such a doctrine I do not believe were converted.

thanks for explaining, although, to me the sinfulness of my nature before Christ came is clearly evident to me. But of course we should not build doctrine on personal experience. Anyway, it's 2 am and time for bed.

David

Romans 6 (Young's Literal Translation)
1What, then, shall we say? shall we continue in the sin that the grace may abound?

2let it not be! we who died to the sin -- how shall we still live in it?

3are ye ignorant that we, as many as were baptized to Christ Jesus, to his death were baptized?

4we were buried together, then, with him through the baptism to the death, that even as Christ was raised up out of the dead through the glory of the Father, so also we in newness of life might walk.

Notice, the literal translation is "the sin," or in other words, the sin nature. We could also say this relates to the sin principle or the law of sin and death.

Have you checked the greek for that, or is that being a literal interpretation an assumption? The point of this topic is that we not trust man (Young was a man) and look to "Thus saith the LORD"

Kenneth Wuest on the subject: “The first thing we must settle is regarding the word “sin,” does it refer here to sin as an abstraction, namely, to acts of sin committed by the believer, or to the totally depraved nature still in him? A rule of Greek syntax settles the question. The definite article appears before the word in Greek text. Here the article points back to a previously mentioned sin defined in its context. The reference is to sin reigning as king (5.21). There sin is personified since it reigns as king. But one cannot conceive of acts of sin reigning as king in the life of a person. They are the result of some dominant factor reigning as king. That can only be the evil nature still resident in the Christian. And here is the key to the interpretation of the entire chapter. Every time the word “sin” is used in this chapter as a noun, it refers to the evil nature in the Christian. Read the following verse and substitute the words “sinful nature” for the word “sin,” and see what a flood of light is thrown upon your understanding of this section of God’s Word (1,2,6,10,11,13,14,16,17,18,20,22,23).”

Other notes: In Romans 7, we see the self dependence and living under law which prevents the Holy Spirit from giving the believer victory over the sinful nature.

As far as a "Thus saith," it is a matter of having the reality revealed within us.

yes, mKAL is on the right track,

do some interlinear study and look at where the word sin is in Rom. It usually has the word TON or TOV right in front. That means 'The Sin' and we can argue with original Scripture for a while now...

But does, "the sin" mean a sinful nature? I will look into it though. (the greek that is) What is sin? "Sin is the transgression of the law" this requires action. I have read of Wuest who John Phillips references many times, I didn't see that mentioned.

One thing I have wondered about, is that cliche
"We sin because we are sinners."

Does this mean that if someone drives too fast down the road, breaking the speed limit, it is from within? Do we speed because we are speeders? or is one a speeder because he speeds?

What I'm trying to say, what about action in sin?

That can only be the evil nature still resident in the Christian

According to Romans 6, a Christian, by definition would not have an evil nature inside him. It would have been dead when they died with Christ and were raised to life with him. If a Christian has an evil nature then what is a new creation? Now the flesh is weak, and can be tempted to Sin, but the Spirit is willing and there is a way to overcome in Jesus for he was tempted in all ways as well.

Amen, That is the truth!

This is exactly the problem: through the teaching of the sinful nature, Satan has stolen victory from the believer! Not victory in themselves, a thousand times no, but IN CHRIST! Sin is rebellion with God, and salvation is submission to God.

As far as I understand Pelagianism... No, I am not. I owe no allegiance to a man, or his theological systems, but to the One who saved me from myself.

BTW, Which website did you search?
If you really want to know what I believe, or closest to it, go to this one: www.straightpathsbiblechurch.com

Just the same, after re-reading your post, if I have been a hinderance in any way to the furtherance of Christian unity, I greatly and deeply apologize. It is not my goal to divide, but to try to bring to light what I believe to be the truth of God. Again, if it has happened that I have been a hinderance to Christian unity, I apologize.

This is exactly the problem: through the teaching of the sinful nature, Satan has stolen victory from the believer! Not in themselves, a thousand times no, but IN CHRIST! Sin is rebellion with God, and salvation is submission to God.

Now the flipside to this, the flesh is very weak. And if we grieve the Spirit we can come into bondage to sin very easily. That is why we need to pick up our cross daily and crucify the flesh by the power of the Holy Spirit. This is a serious daily walk of nailing that flesh, where no good thing dwells, to your cross.

"""According to Romans 6, a Christian, by definition would not have an evil nature inside him."""

If it were so, that would mean that Christ and Satan live in the Same temple. Which is impossible.

In Christ: Phillip

After prayer, I feel it is within all best interests that I leave this thread at this time, having stated my beliefs upon this subject.

I wish you all the greatest blessings from the Hand of the Almighty, and I believe we may rejoice that this thread has even started. This is a firstfruit of awakening, when people begin to say "why?" instead of living on spoon-fed theology. No matter what viewpoint you hold on the subject at hand, it is a thankworthy thing that you have thought about what you have been told, and have "searched the Scriptures" Praise God.

My very best.

P. S. I greatly apologize if any of my words have seemed confusing or hostile, I mean not for them to be that way, I have weighed this with tears and prayer, and I pray that God would not let the words come out in such a way.

Brothers and Sisters, I want to apologize as I feel perhaps my references to the Greek or original meanings, etc., may just lead to a wrong spirit of conversation here. I would only say that I believe Jesus Christ and him crucified is the answer to the issues of sin and sins - and flesh.

it refers to the evil nature in the Christian

Mr. Wuest says these things. But I am not so convinced.

And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. Galatians 5:24

Brothers and Sisters, I want to apologize as I feel perhaps my references to the Greek or original meanings, etc., may just lead to a wrong spirit of conversation here. I would only say that I believe Jesus Christ and him crucified is the answer to the issues of sin and sins - and flesh.

Let peace reign among us brothers and sisters in Christ Jesus.

Before I leave,

I do not agree with all on that website, but there seemed to be a big Finney confusion, and that site had his works on there. There are a few (note, few) other good resources on there, but I DO NOT agree with most of the people on that site. (see my other post with www.straightpathsbiblechurch.com on it, as before mentioned, that is what I believe.)

Thank you for your concern, brother.

Yes, Mykal, that is the answer: Christ, and Him crucified. A thousand Amens.

Many say that once the Believer is Saved, the SN is eradicated. Not exactly so.

This is because we still live in the same earth suit but now by Faith. And God counts that as if it(glorification) has already happened. He does not look on the outward.

our relationship w/ the old man/ old nature has died. It's severed. You can be married and then not be married. The relationship is no more but the two people are alive somewhere.

There is STILL an inward bent to evil desire within every Christian. If you do not think so, let's put all your thoughts from the past 24 hrs on a big screen and eat popcorn.

The real matter is what I think the Lord intended this post to go to. How to get and maintain Victory over these desires that easily take us at times.

So let us examine the real issue here.

After Salvation, do we then switch back to the power of the flesh to be Sanctified? If that happens, surly we fail. Most of the Church does not realize this.

"hey, try my 12 step program"

"do what I did to stop that sin brother"

"read your Bible more"

are just a few of the dumb things people say to Believers -who had shifted their object of Faith from the Even that took place on Calvary, to their own power ie, the flesh- and are now experiencing bouts of sinful activity in their lives.

That is the Romans 7 experience. WE want to go from Rom 6 straight to Rom 8. But we DO and I yell, WE DO, go through a Romans 7 road and bang our head against the wall until we place out faith back in Jesus and Him Crucified.

hope this helps us.

Remember, the real important issue of this thread-

There is STILL an inward bent to evil desire within every Christian

No there is not. Stop talking about the bride of Christ that way. She does not have some inward bent to evil desire. She desires her bridegroom.

our relationship w/ the old man/ old nature has died. It's severed. You can be married and then not be married. The relationship is no more but the two people are alive somewhere.

The Word does not say that a "relationship" has died it says

"He who has died is free form sin" Romans 6:7

"Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?" Romans 6:3

"For the love of Christ controls us, having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died;" 2 Corinthians 5:14

"Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come." 2 Corinthians 5:17

The real matter is what I think the Lord intended this post to go to. How to get and maintain Victory over these desires that easily take us at times.

Believe the Word of God and he will set you free.

"and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free." John 8:32

No there is not. Stop talking about the bride of Christ that way. She does not have some inward bent to evil desire. She desires her bridegroom.

haha travis thank you for that

Rom 8:8,9
verse 9 But yet are in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Sounds like this verse is referring to unbelievers, HE IS NONE OF HIS.

We are not in the flesh, but IN the Spirit.

And he said to [them] all, If any [man] will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

Luke 9:23

Rom 8:13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

exactly!!! It is a narrow way. Yes we are a new creation, but the flesh must be mortified daily by the power of the Holy Spirit. All this is done by FAITH in CHRIST. We must trust him completely.

myveryheart and star of God, your posts are laughable.

So how about we put your thoughts up on that screen I talked about? still think you are not capable of wickedness?

Not trying to call you out but 1000s of Christians who are trying to figure out how to please God are failing. And they do not know why. It's important to know what is going on.

Yes, according to God's eyes, the Bride is spotless. But as far as the rest of us, we live in the REAL world w/ failures. We are not pharisees that say we are now perfect and no longer need Jesus and Grace daily...

So as far as those of us who were offended by such a dumb and condemning statements, please forgive these people-

MyVeryHeart said:

According to Romans 6, a Christian, by definition would not have an evil nature inside him. It would have been dead when they died with Christ and were raised to life with him. If a Christian has an evil nature then what is a new creation? Now the flesh is weak, and can be tempted to Sin, but the Spirit is willing and there is a way to overcome in Jesus for he was tempted in all ways as well.

Amen! It has so often been portrayed that Christians have a duality of nature. The most common picture I have heard painted was that of a white dog and a black dog living inside of us and the one we feed the most will be the one who dominates. The only scriptural support for this view is what I consider a gross misinterpretation of Roman's 7. When read in context with chapter 6 and chapter 8, chapter 7 quickly comes into context and makes sense in the flow of the letter. We are crucified with Christ. Our old man is dead. So, even if we had a "sin nature" it is gone now that we have been born again. Old things have passed away, all things are made new. The body of sin had been put to death. Romans 6 and 7 tie the law and sin together inextricably. The law, though holy, gave strength to sin, caused it to be known as exceedingly sinful, and caused us to die in our own efforts to keep a law that we knew to be just and holy and that in our spirits we longed to keep. When we died with Christ we died to the law. In doing this we quit trusting in our own effort to be righteous and received a righteousness that was not our own. We entered into the sabbath rest of faith in Christ. We ceased from our own labors. We became dead to sin and now we live in Christ or rather He lives through us.

The real danger in believing we have a "sin nature" is the tendency this idea has to keep us bound by sin. When we have a revelation of our new creation, of our regeneration, of being made completely righteous in our spirits, of being totally dead to sin, we then have power over sin like we never had before. We no longer see ourselves as locked in a struggle with an old nature trying to overcome it, but we see ourselves as walking in the liberty wherein Christ has made us free. (Of course I am talking about seeing ourselves in the spirit. Not psychology, but rather a spiritual reality that is revealed to us in our hearts by the Holy Spirit.) When we awake to righteousness we are empowered by God's grace to sin not. Recall the letter to Titus that teaches us that it is God's grace that teaches us not to sin. It is His graced that empowers us. When we reckon ourselves dead to sin and alive unto God, when we get a revelation of what we have been made in the spirit, when we awake to what we are, then we no longer strive in our own strength, but rely on His and have victory.

Quote: This is exactly the problem: through the teaching of the sinful nature, Satan has stolen victory from the believer! Not in themselves, a thousand times no, but IN CHRIST! Sin is rebellion with God, and salvation is submission to God. Now the flipside to this, the flesh is very weak. And if we grieve the Spirit we can come into bondage to sin very easily. That is why we need to pick up our cross daily and crucify the flesh by the power of the Holy Spirit. This is a serious daily walk of nailing that flesh, where no good thing dwells, to your cross.

Yes. The battle is not one of two conflicting natures, but it is the battle against the flesh. When I was born again, there was a part of me that was regenerated (spirit) and a part of me that was not (flesh or body, mind, and emotions). I am being transformed in my mind and emotions from glory to glory by the Word of God and the Spirit of God. But I will still battle the flesh. But now I have power to be victorious through Jesus Christ. However, if I do miss the mark and sin, I have an advocate with the Father, Christ Jesus and I can rely on His grace and forgiveness, repent, and keep going with Him. Praise God for that!

myveryheart and star of God, your posts are laughable.

This isn't funny

So how about we put your thoughts up on that screen I talked about? still think you are not capable of wickedness?

Every thought does not originate with us. Some are fiery darts shot by the devil. That is why we must bring every, every, every, thought captive to the obedience of Christ.

Not trying to call you out but 1000s of Christians who are trying to figure out how to please God are failing. And they do not know why. It's important to know what is going on.

The reason that many who try to please God are failing is because they do not trust God but instead trust in their own flesh to please God. They have invented a form of Godliness that lacks the power thereof. they are striving in the Flesh. The flesh profits nothing.

Yes, according to God's eyes, the Bride is spotless. But as far as the rest of us, we live in the REAL world w/ failures. We are not pharisees that say we are now perfect and no longer need Jesus and Grace daily...

God sees things as they really are. If his Bride is spotless then she is really spotless because the Holy Spirit is inside of her, she has been justified by Christ, and she mortifies the flesh daily,God has cleansed Her, he has done it SHE HAS NOT done it herself. She needs grace daily, and communion with her LORD daily, lest she die from want of HIM. You seem to be receiving some kind of strange teaching on the Bride of Christ. I am concerned for you.

So as far as those of us who were offended by such a dumb and condemning statements, please forgive these people-

Unless our righteousness exceeds that of the Pharisees we will NOT enter the kingdom of Heaven. They where like clean cups on the outside but filthy on the inside. The children of the Kingdom are clean inside and out. And if they do happen to fall from Grace then the blood of Christ cleanses them as they confess their sin. The Children of the Kingdom are humble of heart and realize they are so needy of his Grace. That is why they are not Pharisees, they realize they are sinners and need the mercy of God every, every, every day. And so they ask God for it and they are justified.

The real danger in believing we have a "sin nature" is the tendency this idea has to keep us bound by sin.

Or to use it to justify your sin.

When we reckon ourselves dead to sin and alive unto God, when we get a revelation of what we have been made in the spirit, when we awake to what we are, then we no longer strive in our own strength, but rely on His and have victory.

Amen. It is Christ in us and it is by Faith (complete trust) in Him that we walk this out daily.

I found the following essay by Jerry Bridges entitled Gospel Driven Sanctification. It has really helped me understand what it means for a Christian to be dead to sin. I am posting only a portion.

What does Paul mean when he says we died to sin? It's fairly obvious he doesn't mean we died to the daily committal of sin. If that were true, no honest person could claim to be justified because we all sin daily. None of us truly loves God with our whole being and none of us actually loves our neighbor as ourselves (see Matt. 22:35-40). Nor does it mean we have died in the sense of being no longer responsive to sin's temptations, as some have taught. If that were true, Peter's admonition to abstain from the passions of the flesh would be pointless (see 1 Pet. 2:11). So what does Paul mean?
Some Bible commentators believe that Paul means only that we have died to the penalty of sin. That is, because of our union with Christ, when Christ died to sin's penalty we also died to sin's penalty. Well, it certainly means that, but it also means much more. It also means we died to sin's dominion.
What is the dominion of sin? In Romans 5:21, Paul speaks of sin's reign. And in Colossians 1:13, he speaks of the domain of darkness. When Adam sinned in the Garden, we all sinned through our legal union with him (see Rom. 5:12-21). That is, because of our identity with Adam we all suffered the consequence of his sin. And a part of that consequence is to be born into this world under the reign or dominion of sin. Paul describes what it means to be under this dominion in Ephesians 2:1-3. He says we were spiritually dead; we followed the ways of the world and the devil; we lived in the passions of our sinful natures and were, by nature, objects of God's wrath.
This slavery to the dominion of sin then is part of the penalty due to our guilt of sin. Through our union with Christ in his death, however, our guilt both from Adam's and from our own personal sins was forever dealt with. Having died with Christ to the guilt of sin, we also as a consequence died to the dominion of sin. We cannot continue in sin as a dominant way of life because the reign of sin over us has forever been broken.
This death to the dominion of sin over us is known theologically as definitive sanctification. It refers to the decisive break with, or separation from, sin as a ruling power in a believer's life. It is a point-in-time event, occurring simultaneously with justification. It is the fundamental change wrought in us by the monergistic action of the Holy Spirit (that is, by the Spirit acting alone without human permission or assistance) when he delivers us from the kingdom of darkness and transfers us into the kingdom of Christ. This definitive break with the dominion of sin occurs in the life of everyone who trusts in Christ as Savior. There is no such thing as justification without definitive sanctification. They both come to us as a result of Christ's work for us.
Consider Yourselves Dead to Sin
So we are free from both the guilt and the dominion of sin. But what use is this information to us? How can it help us live out a gospel-based pursuit of sanctification? Here Paul's instructions in Romans 6:11 are helpful: "So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus."
It is important we understand what Paul is saying here because he is not telling us to do something but to believe something. We are to believe that we are dead through Christ to both sin's penalty and its dominion. But this is not something we make come true by believing it. We simply are dead to sin, whether we believe it or not. But the practical effects of our death to sin can be realized only as we believe it to be true.
The fact is that we are guilty in ourselves, but God no longer charges that guilt against us because it has already been borne by Christ as our substitute. The sentence has been served. The penalty has been paid. We have died to sin, both to its guilt and to its dominion. That is why Paul can write, "Blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin" (Rom. 4:8).
But the question arises, "If I've died to sin's dominion, why do I still struggle with sin patterns in my life?" The answer to that question lies in the word struggle. Unbelievers do not struggle with sin. They may seek to overcome some bad habit, but they do not see that habit as sin. They do not have a sense of sin against a holy God. Believers, on the other hand, struggle with sin as sin. We see our sinful words, thoughts, and deeds as sin against God; and we feel guilty because of it. This is where we must continue to go back to the gospel. To consider ourselves dead to sin is to believe the gospel.
This doesn't mean that we just believe the gospel and live complacently in our sin. Absolutely not! Go back again to Paul's words in Romans 6:1-2. We died both to sin's guilt and its dominion. Though sin can wage war against us (hence our struggle), it cannot reign over us. That is also part of the gospel. But the success of our struggle with sin begins with our believing deep down in our hearts that regardless of our failures and our struggle, we have died to sin's guilt. We must believe that however often we fail, there is no condemnation for us (Rom. 8:1).
William Romaine, who was one of the leaders of the eighteenth-century revival in England, wrote, "No sin can be crucified either in heart or life unless it first be pardoned in conscience.... If it be not mortified in its guilt, it cannot be subdued in its power." What Romaine was saying is that if you do not believe you have died to sin's guilt, you cannot trust Christ for the strength to subdue its power in your life. So the place to begin in dealing with sin is to believe the gospel when it says you have died to sin's guilt.
Progressive Sanctification
Warring against our sinful habits and seeking to put on Christlike character is usually called sanctification. But because the term definitive sanctification is used to describe the point-in-time deliverance from the dominion of sin, it is helpful to speak of Christian growth in holiness as progressive sanctification. Additionally, the word progressive indicates continual growth in holiness over time. The New Testament writers both assume growth (see 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Eph. 2:19-21; Col. 2:19; 2 Thess. 1:3); and continually urge us to pursue it (see 2 Cor. 7:1; Heb. 12:14; 2 Pet. 3:18). There is no place in authentic Christianity for stagnant, self-satisfied, and self-righteous Christians. Rather we should be seeking to grow in Christlikeness until we die.
This progressive sanctification always involves our practice of spiritual disciplines, such as reading Scripture, praying, and regularly fellowshipping with other believers. It also involves putting to death the sinful deeds of the body (see Rom. 8:13) and putting on Christlike character (see Col. 3:12-14). And very importantly it involves a desperate dependence on Christ for the power to do these things, for we cannot grow by our own strength.
So sanctification involves hard work and dependence on Christ; what I call dependent effort. And it will always mean we are dissatisfied with our performance. For a growing Christian, desire will always outstrip performance or, at least, perceived performance. What is it then that will keep us going in the face of this tension between desire and performance? The answer is the gospel. It is the assurance in the gospel that we have indeed died to the guilt of sin and that there is no condemnation for us in Christ Jesus that will motivate us and keep us going even in the face of this tension.

What does Paul mean when he says we died to sin? It's fairly obvious he doesn't mean we died to the daily committal of sin. If that were true, no honest person could claim to be justified because we all sin daily

Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. 1 John 3:9

We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. 1 John 5:18

For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Romans 6:14

If this is the Christian's avenue to victory of the flesh, maybe we should look into what "walking in the Spirit", really is.

As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, [so] walk ye in him: Colossians 2:6

Some seem to think there is great benefit disecting the rotting corpse of the sin nature of the first Adam

I choose instead to fix my eyes upon the righteous character of the life giving Spirit of the second Adam

We are nowhere told to fixate on our total depravity

We are strongly admonished to fix out eyes upon the author and perfector of our faith.

Those who gaze upon the glory of God in the face of Christ will be transformed into the same image from glory to glory

I wonder what will be gained from those gazing upon Adam's rotting corpse?

It is interesting what the Word tells us to "put off" and what it tells us to "put on".

Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry:
For which things' sake the wrath of God cometh on the children of disobedience: In the which ye also walked some time, when ye lived in them. But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth. Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new [man], which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: Colossians 3:5-10

Let us put on love and let peace also reign in our hearts for Christ is Risen!!!

To all who have ears to hear:

Regardless of what your position is on “Christians struggling against sin” or “being born-again preceding/following repentance”, remember this: If you are outside of Christ, you are condemned already.

Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God (John 3:18). For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by His grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus (Romans 3:23-24).

Crystal clear. Justification is in Christ alone, and every single person needs it. Why? Because all have sinned. Who is it that justifies? God. (Romans 8:33) Does God justify on the basis of upholding the Law? No. Then what becomes of our boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law (Romans 3:27-28).

Salvation is a work of God, not without effect. Therefore, no one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother (1 John 3:9-10).

I can tell you that I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me (Galatians 2:20).

What about you? Have you died with Christ? Is it Christ who lives in you? Or is it still the same old you, trying to work your way into heaven? If you are outside of Christ, you are a slave to sin, even if you do not realize it (Ephesians 2:1-5; Romans 6:16-18). You do not live to please God, indeed, you cannot do so (Hebrews 11:6). But, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away and behold, the new has come (2 Corinthians 5:17).

Thus, remember that there is none righteous, no, not one (Romans 3:10). But Jesus was wounded for our transgressions; He was crushed for our iniquities; upon Him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with His stripes we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned--everyone--to his own way; and the LORD has laid on Him the iniquity of us all (Isaiah 53:5-6).

Stop trying to justify your wickedness. Stop trying to diminish the sinfulness of man. Stop accusing God by your twisted reasoning. Stop exchanging the wisdom of God for your supposed wisdom, since the foolishness of God is wiser than men (1 Corinthians 1:25).

Therefore I tell you, seek the LORD while He may be found; call upon Him while He is near. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the LORD, that He may have compassion on him; to our God, for He will abundantly pardon. “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isaiah 55:6-9).

Know this: Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved (Romans 10:13). Call on Him, while the light is still with you.

Do we have a separate sin nature or a depraved corrupted sinful human nature that has been twisted by the fall? Otherwise, known as the sinful nature, original sin, depravity, carnality, the flesh, etc.
It's obvious from Scripture that we are not born pure, but sinful. But thank God there is a cure in the blood of Christ!