No inherited sin...

I'm confused. 

The op is titled, "No inherited sin," but I don't read anything in the opening post about inherited sin. Neither do I find any of the verses cited saying anything about the matter. They are read to say things they do not actually state, and I wonder why anyone would abuse God's word that way. While i wholeheartedly agree with the premise God intended from the beginning to make a bride and that is His purpose in creating creation, I do not find that is complete. Not only could God have many purposes for creation, our being Hs bride is not all that God is making of us. 



As to the matter of inherited sin, some clarification is probably warranted because the original doctrine of "original sin," now has a basis in modern knowledge that was unknown to the ECFs when that doctrine was first formed. For example, they knew very little about genetics bac then and we now know everything a human observes hears and experiences gets recorded in the cells of the bran and through the process of cellular mitosis a record of all our experiences eventually gets reproduced into every cell of the body. What this means is that the record of his disobedience and all the consequences Adam experienced got recorded in every cell of his body. 

including his gonads. 

Eve's gonads, too. 

That cellular record then got transferred to their progeny. There is, therefore, a very real, tangible and undeniable bass for inherited sin. 




Then there's the matter of God not making people corrupt. God did not make Adam and Eve corrupt. They made themselves corrupt and reason inescapably tells us two imperfect creatures cannot make perfect progeny. The appeal to God's making ignores human making. Regardless of whether or not God makes people corrupt all have sinned and fall short of Hs glory. All are corrupt. 

And, lastly, free will is not a necessity and no case for that position was posted. God can make brides of creatures with any degree of volitional agency. 

Accusing posters of blindness is rude, disrespectful, a violation of the forum's rules of conduct, and completely off-topic. 



The facts in evidence remain: 1) Because Adam and Eve were physiologically affected by their disobedience and the ensuing consequences there is plenty of evidence, and therefore reason, for understanding sin is inherited and 2) eisegetic readings of scripture, false-cause reasoning, and the derisive response do not change anything. 

That is not all that is sin. Sin is not measured ONLY by the law. 1 John 3:4 is not the only verse in the Bible that defines sin. Sin is many things. The word "sin" literally means the missing of the target and the law is not the only target. Perfection, righteousness, and holiness are also targets by which sin is measured. Any unrighteousness is sin (1 Jn. 5:17). Anything not done in faith is also sin (Rom. 14:23). Sin reigned long before the Law was given. 

Christ did not just redeem us from the curse of the law. He redeemed from all forms of sin and sinfulness. 

Whether an embryo or a child knows good or evil, sin, sinlessness, or sinfulness is irrelevant. Knowledge is irrelevant. One of the sins from which Jesus redeemed us is the unknown sin! Praise God! 

It is common, maybe even popular, for some among us to believe a person is not held accountable until they know what is and isn't sin, and that was a part of Jewish theology, but there is no such scripture. Scripture says ALL have sinned and fall short of God glory. It does not say, "All but little children...." The word "all" means all. Death has come to ALL. 

That is true but it is irrelevant to what I said. What I said is plain and simple, and I evidenced it with scripture plainly stated and plainly read: Scripture defines sin in several places and in several ways.... not just one way. So in reply to the response, "The law depicts the perfect nature of God...." I say, "Amen!" but I also say, "So what? That ignores the more important parts of this conversation, namely the fact that scripture does not limit the definition of sin to the law." When a Christian limits the understanding of sin to the law they do themselves a disservice because the rest of scripture is being neglected. Scripture defines sin in several places, not one place. Scripture defines sin in different ways, not one way. The law depicts the perfect nature of God but so does all of scripture! ALL scripture depicts the perfect nature of God. The law depicts the perfect nature of God but the law that depicts the perfect nature of God is not the only way the perfect God defined sin.


And those facts are being ignored in this thread.

Any correct understanding of inherited sin is going to be dependent upon a whole and correct understanding of sin, not a partial understanding of sin garnered from one verse in the Bible at the expense of all others. The whole of the perfect God's scripture is being neglected in favor of one verse and one point of view that does not represent the whole of all that God said. God defined sin in different ways in different places because He wanted to do so. He wants is to know and understand sin in ALL those ways, not just the one way stated in 1John 3:4. I provided the scriptural references so everyone could look them up and verify what I posted.

And the response ignored all that scripture.

Please do not do that again. Join with me in reading the whole of scripture, accepting ALL that God said in His perfect word as He defined sin for us. Do not limit your understanding to just one verse when God Himself did not do so.
Yeah, I don't know whether that quote mine was done on purpose on purpose, but I don't care. If you're trolling the stop it. If you're not trolling, then stop ignoring the context of what I posted. Knowledge of sin is irrelevant. I did not say all knowledge is irrelevant and nothing I posted should even remotely be construed to imply such a thing. Knowledge of sin is irrelevant to the definition of sin. A person does not have to have a definition of sin to be sinful. One of the things Paul told us about the law is that the law makes us aware of, or knowledgeable of sin (Rom. 7:7). Our being sinful is not dependent upon our knowing what is sin. A sinner can be completely ignorant of his sin and still be sinful. Knowledge of sin is irrelevant to the condition of sinfulness. Paul also plainly stated sin reigned from the time of Adam until Moses (Rom. 5:14). In other words, sin reign the entire time prior to the giving of the law. The giving of the law did not make sin exist. Sin existed and it ruled long before the law was ever given. When that passage speaks of sin not being held in account that does not mean sinners living from Adam to Moses did not suffer the wages of sin. Long before anyone knew the law people were sinful. Knowledge of it is irrelevant. There are millions of people living today who deny the existence of sin. Their denial of sin does not stop sin from being sin. Their ignorance or lack of knowledge does not stop them from being sinfully sinful sinners. Their knowledge of sin is irrelevant. Their ignorance of sin is irrelevant.

And when the context of what I posted is ignored it is disingenuous. It is also ironic because that was either done deliberately (knowledge of sin) or by mistake (ignorance of sin). Either way it is wrong. Knowing or not knowing does not change its sinfulness. So please do not quote mine my posts again. What I said was, "Whether an embryo or a child knows good or evil, sin, sinlessness, or sinfulness is irrelevant. Knowledge is irrelevant. One of the sins from which Jesus redeemed us is the unknown sin! Praise God!" and I stand by those statements.

In the Old Testament God provided a sacrifice for sins that were committed unawares, or unknowingly.

Leviticus 5:17 KJV
And if a soul sin, and commit any of these things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the LORD; though he wist it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity.

Leviticus 5:17 NAS
Now if a person sins and does any of the things which the LORD has commanded not to be done, though he was unaware, he is still guilty and shall bear his punishment.

Leviticus 5:17 ESV
If anyone sins, doing any of the things that by the LORD’s commandments ought not to be done, though he did not know it, then realizes his guilt, he shall bear his iniquity.

Leviticus 5:17 NIV
If anyone sins and does what is forbidden in any of the LORD’s commands, even though they do not know it, they are guilty and will be held responsible.

Hebrews 9:6-7
Now when these things have been so prepared, the priests are continually entering the outer tabernacle, performing the divine worship, 7but into the second, only the high priest enters once a year, not without taking blood which he offers for himself and for the sins of the people committed in ignorance.


People sin without knowing they have sinned. Scripture is very plain about this. They sin in ignorance. People sin apart from the law that depicts the perfect nature of God and one of the reasons this happens is because the law is not the sole definition of sin. The law is one means of defining sin, not the sole means. 

Psalm 19:12
Who can understand his errors? Cleanse thou me from secret faults.

And God did exactly that in Christ. God provided a sacrifice in Christ that covered the secret faults, the errors that are not understood. A person's knowledge of their sin is irrelevant to their being sinful. People are sinful whether they know it or not. In that context, knowledge is irrelevant. In point of fact, one of the reason the scriptures direct us to fellowship is so that our knowledge of sin may be better known. 

Hebrews 10:23-29
23Let’s hold firmly to the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; 24and let’s consider how to encourage one another in love and good deeds, 25not abandoning our own meeting together, as is the habit of some people, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near. 26For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27but a terrifying expectation of judgment and the fury of a fire which will consume the adversaries. 28Anyone who has ignored the Law of Moses is put to death without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much more severe punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace?

In other words, fellowship, not just the written law, is a means for knowing when, where, and how we have sinned. This is what we're doing right here, right now, in this forum in this thread. Someone has asserted 1 John 3:4 as THE definition of sin but according to the WHOLE word of God that depicts His perfect nature, neither 1 John 3:4 nor the law is the sole definition of sin. Scripture defines sin in a number of places in a number of different ways, some of which have nothing to do with the law. Sin existed before the law was give. Neither knowledge of sin, nor ignorance of sin, has much to do with one's sinfulness. It has a lot to do with handling one's sinfulness, but it does not change the condition of sinfulness.


Here's one reason why this is important: Defining sin based solely on one verse in neglect of all else that scripture states defining sin is sinful! In other words, the thread itself has become an object lesson for understanding the problem of sin.... and its inheritance . The sin of proof-texting is committed either willfully, or in ignorance. Those are the only two options. If it's willful then nothing I or anyone else posts is likely to change that sinner's mind on the matter. He is sinning willfully  . If, on the other hand, that sin was committed unwittingly, unintentionally..... then the knowledge of whole scripture can and should change everything. The person who, having received the whole counsel of God's word in all that it says defining sin, will accept that counsel, receive it in faith, apply it in thought, word, and deed in an observable manner and the error will not be repeated is different.

Why?

Because that person can no longer say they do not know! They now know a wholer and more diverse definition of sin AND dwell in untiy with the brethren AND have greater integrity and consensus with the whole of God's word. Proof-texting never accomplishes any of that. 


A person can sin and be sinful without knowing it. Knowledge of sin and sinfulness is irrelevant to being sinful. NOTHING in scripture says knowledge of sin has any bearing on one's sinful condition of sinfulness, and there are numerous places in God's word that state this explicitly and say it implicitly.

• Sin is any imperfection.
• Sin is anything not done in faith.
• Sin is any unrighteousness. 
• Sin is lawlessness.

.


This wholer understanding is more empowering. The wholer understanding helps us understand the problem of sin, especially as it applies to whether or not sin is inherited. 

All are held accountable for what they don't know as well. Only God knows the heart. The [human] heart is many things, but above all else it is deceitful, and no one knows all the sins they have committed. No one fully understand the severity of their own sinfulness. This is why God made provision for unknown sins and sins done in ignorance. 


Things are being read into scripture it does not actually state, and things it does state are being neglected. People will be held accountable for every known sin AND they will be held accountable for every unknown sin. The two are not mutually exclusive. 

The fact children are born ignorant of Christ and lacking faith in Christ is evidence of inherited sin. Christ, the tree of life, once dwelt in the garden and every human living in Eden had the privilege, benefit, and knowledge of that existence.

That changed at Genesis 3:6-24

Genesis 3:24
So He drove the man out; and at the east of the Garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.


We inherited that. It was not the way God made us. It is a direct consequence of one man's disobedience by which death has come to all and all sin (apart from the law). Now none are born knowing the tree of life, none are born with any faith in the tree of life that once dwelt among humanity, none of us are born believing in the name of that tree, the one and only Son of God. As a consequence of these changes, none are righteous, and all stand already condemned.


There is not a person born who does not inherit these things.