Original Sin: Guilty but not Condemned?

  Рет қаралды 189

Layman Bible Lounge

Layman Bible Lounge

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 13
@havenofear7033
@havenofear7033 21 күн бұрын
This was a good eye-opener. Shared it with my FaceBook group. Thank you.
@LaymanBibleLounge
@LaymanBibleLounge 21 күн бұрын
@@havenofear7033 thanks for sharing!
@kevinsBiblicaldiscussions
@kevinsBiblicaldiscussions 21 күн бұрын
I will definitely be watching this.
@LaymanBibleLounge
@LaymanBibleLounge 21 күн бұрын
Happy to hear your thoughts!
@kevinsBiblicaldiscussions
@kevinsBiblicaldiscussions 21 күн бұрын
There is also the position that your nature becomes sinful the first time that you sin
@havenofear7033
@havenofear7033 21 күн бұрын
That is my view.
@BradMcFadden
@BradMcFadden 20 күн бұрын
But we are not guilty of sins we did NOT commit. We are NOT guilty of Adam’s sin we are guilty of our sin. The Bible does not teach inherited guilt.
@LaymanBibleLounge
@LaymanBibleLounge 19 күн бұрын
@@BradMcFadden I agree
@Dizerner
@Dizerner 10 күн бұрын
You're conflating Original Sin with Original Guilt.
@LaymanBibleLounge
@LaymanBibleLounge 10 күн бұрын
@@Dizerner inherited adamic guilt is historically one of the components of the western doctrine of original sin. If a view uses the title original sin but rejects inherited guilt, it’s not really original sin. That view would be essentially ancestral sin. So no, I’m not conflating the two.
@LaymanBibleLounge
@LaymanBibleLounge 10 күн бұрын
@@Dizerner if you look at my articles and videos that frame the issue, I categorize the affirmation of inherited guilt as an original sin view and the denial of inherited guilt as an ancestral sin view. But both views do overlap on other consequences of the fall which everyone affirms (like mortality, a fallen world, personal sin etc.)
@Dizerner
@Dizerner 9 күн бұрын
@@LaymanBibleLounge Yes, you ARE conflating the two, because just asserting they are the same does not prove it. Original sin as the doctrine teaches that because of Adam's sin we are each born sinful with a sin nature. It does NOT teach, and never HAS taught, that every individual is held personally responsible for a direct violation of God's command in clear light and grace that led to billions of souls being eternally lost in hell and the entire creation being cursed, that is not the doctrine. Original Guilt is a false accretion upon Original Sin, and very distinct from it. Consider this explanation of Original Sin by Tertullian, 200 years before Augustine even lived: “Every soul, then, by reason of its birth, has its nature in Adam until it is born again in Christ; moreover, it is unclean all the while that it remains without this regeneration; and because unclean, it is actively sinful, and suffuses even the flesh (by reason of their conjunction) with its own shame.” Notice there is NO description or talk of Adam's specific sin being imputed to people as their guilt... none. It is a transference of a sin nature that is the core of Original Sin.
Early Christians on Romans 5
42:16
Layman Bible Lounge
Рет қаралды 306
The Origin of the Soul: A Comprehensive Analysis
1:51:39
Layman Bible Lounge
Рет қаралды 193
Мен атып көрмегенмін ! | Qalam | 5 серия
25:41
Mom Hack for Cooking Solo with a Little One! 🍳👶
00:15
5-Minute Crafts HOUSE
Рет қаралды 23 МЛН
Why Majora's Mask's Blue Dog Took 25 Years to Win the Race
21:04
Vidya James
Рет қаралды 2,5 МЛН
Infant Salvation in the Baptist Tradition
26:43
Layman Bible Lounge
Рет қаралды 180
Things to Remember when Reading Ehrman
17:23
Vince Endris
Рет қаралды 4,6 М.
Michael Heiser critiques the “church-age” long doctrine of Original Sin
14:43
30MINS IN HELL WITH ADAM AND EVE
33:07
Untold Mystery
Рет қаралды 3,1 М.
Why Islamic Philosophy Should Matter to Christians
25:35
Theology Made
Рет қаралды 75 М.
Parable of the Rich Fool: Renewing Your Mind
26:25
Renewing Your Mind
Рет қаралды 557
Мен атып көрмегенмін ! | Qalam | 5 серия
25:41