Disagreement Upon Corrupt Natures

treeplanter

Well-known member
Myself and my Christian interlocutor agree that it is utterly impossible for any human being on earth to live a perfectly sinless life

Each of us, we agree, are inevitably compelled to sin at least once due to our corrupted natures

However, whereas I ascribe our corrupted natures to a decision made by YHVH/Jesus Christ, my 'esteemed' colleague contends that a corrupt nature that inevitably compels sin is a naturally inheritable occurrence that does not consciously and purposefully come from any particular source

Who here agrees with this assessment?
 
Last edited:
Myself and my Christian interlocutor agree that it is utterly impossible for any human being on earth to live a perfectly sinless life

Each of us, we agree, are inevitably compelled to sin at least once due to our corrupted natures

However, whereas I ascribe our corrupted natures to a decision made by YHVH/Jesus Christ, my 'esteemed' colleague contends that a corrupt nature that inevitably compels sin is a naturally inheritable occurrence that does not consciously and purposefully come from any particular source

Who here agrees with this assessment?

Not I. I disagree with your Christian interlocutor whoever he is.

This is not just a mere doctrine for me. I know from experience that there is indeed a SOURCE which compels me to "consciously and purposefully" sin when I do.

It is I. I am the source of my sin.
 
Myself and my Christian interlocutor agree that it is utterly impossible for any human being on earth to live a perfectly sinless life

You should probably expand your horizon a lil bit.

Try using your arguments against other Christians face to face. Maybe you'll achieve even more entertainment?

Each of us, we agree, are inevitably compelled to sin at least once due to our corrupted natures

Perhaps. I would take that as an opinion.

Who here agrees with this assessment?

What's your problem with it?
 
Myself and my Christian interlocutor agree that it is utterly impossible for any human being on earth to live a perfectly sinless life

Each of us, we agree, are inevitably compelled to sin at least once due to our corrupted natures

However, whereas I ascribe our corrupted natures to a decision made by YHVH/Jesus Christ, my 'esteemed' colleague contends that a corrupt nature that inevitably compels sin is a naturally inheritable occurrence that does not consciously and purposefully come from any particular source

Who here agrees with this assessment?

There are segments of Christianity that deny original sin and a sin nature.

I believe they are gravely mistaken and many Scriptures clearly indicate that Adam and Eve's sin passed on to us a sin nature.

The end result of denying original sin, is to take a stand and ground that humans are inherently good, which the Bible describes as self-righteous pride, this is having the Deity owe us because our actions and attitudes are inherently meritorious.

Even if they admit they have sinned—and almost all denominations that deny OS do admit they sin—they still claim to be fundamentally good people who made a bad choice. When one points out the odds of billions of fundamentally good-natured people not having one actually live out their sinless nature seems quite strange, they simply turn a blind eye to it.

The Bible goes quite beyond that, and calls people fundamentally bad (and yes—through no fault of their own, this is the offense that brings the objection).

Verses like: There is no one good but God, in your flesh dwells no good thing, all have fallen short of the glory of God, by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified, the Pharisees were those who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, they stumbled at the stumbling stone because they sought righteousness as if it were by works of the Law, if I rebuild what I destroyed I show myself to be a transgressor, the wicked turn astray from the womb, and on and on.

I'm not denying they attempt to reintepret these verses in a self-righteous way, but it seems to me quite impossible to convincingly do that, and almost all original sin deniers will also admit it is impossible to keep the Law and be sinless, which logically equates to the same thing as a sinful nature without them seeming to realize it.
 
No, it's not.

It's to deny that we are inherently bad.

Not the same thing.

I'm speaking from a theological point of view, that is, within the framework of morality Scripture gives us, which states we have an essence or nature that either logically merits something or does not, on top of the actions we perform (which also have the same dichotomy). The lost are called "by nature children of wrath," and the Law of God is said to be impossible to perfectly keep.

Logically, no doubt we can posit neutrality and self-determining character; that is, it's not a logical impossibility. I would point out we would find completely sinless people under this scenario, but I see this as more of an "in house" debate, not an evangelistic one.
 
The lost are called "by nature children of wrath," and the Law of God is said to be impossible to perfectly keep.
If a (human) society made laws that were impossible to keep, would we consider it fair?

If said society provided a loophole by way of a human sacrifice - even a willing one - would we consider it benevolent?
 
Not I. I disagree with your Christian interlocutor whoever he is.

This is not just a mere doctrine for me. I know from experience that there is indeed a SOURCE which compels me to "consciously and purposefully" sin when I do.

It is I. I am the source of my sin.
So, tell me, when was it that YOU decided that you shall be born with a corrupt nature that inevitably compels sin?

Was it when you were in the womb?
Before you were even conceived?

I'm curious!
 
So, tell me, when was it that YOU decided that you shall be born with a corrupt nature that inevitably compels sin?

I never made any decisions before I was born, except maybe to kick a little.

Was it when you were in the womb?

I guess maybe I did kick my Mom a little too hard when I was in the womb if you want to call that a sin.

Before you were even conceived?

I really never did much of anything before I was conceived.

I'm curious ..........

............ yellow? I never saw that. It was before my time and I think it was rated X.
 
I never made any decisions before I was born
Then who decided, on your behalf, that you would be born with a corrupt nature that INEVITABLY COMPELS sin?

The guaranteed impossibility of transcending one's nature is not something that is naturally inheritable, stiggy

Someone had to have decided that we are to be born with corrupt natures that inevitably compel sin
Who do you think it was?
 
Then who decided, on your behalf, that you would be born with a corrupt nature that INEVITABLY COMPELS sin?

Nobody, I reckon. I don't think I had a "corrupt nature" at birth. I did live in a corrupt world and it quickly rubbed off on me, especially when I reached puberty.
 
Myself and my Christian interlocutor agree that it is utterly impossible for any human being on earth to live a perfectly sinless life
Sounds like you're throwing a temper tantrum.
By the looks of it, @Dizerner provided a pretty concise description of the human condition.
Adam ate the fruit God told him would result in his death.

That death fundamentally changed his spiritual nature. And that change impacted the entire human race.

THIS is what theologians call original sin.

I have an interesting book about this issue. And because it's so old, the copyright law has released it, and it's VERY inexpensively available.

I'll have to warn you, it's a lengthy read, and is incredibly tedious. Even more so for a guy like you who is constantly throwing temper tantrums at every little thing you don't like.

The title is: Human Nature in its Fourfold State. The author is Thomas Boston. It was originally published in 1811, so some of the language is really dated.

I picked up my copy for my phone for $0.99 from Amazon.

Each of us, we agree, are inevitably compelled to sin at least once due to our corrupted natures
You're still not understanding why.
Adam's nature was passed along to us.
Adam's nature was separated from God, cutting him, and subsequently the rest of the human race, off from God.

Ranting and whining about it isn't going to change anything.

God created us the way he did, and that's it.
We were created in his image and likeness.
Part of that is that we are given choice. Adam's choice was the tree of life or the tree that brought death.
He chose death. In spite of knowing what it would bring.




However, whereas I ascribe our corrupted natures to a decision made by YHVH/Jesus Christ, my 'esteemed' colleague contends that a corrupt nature that inevitably compels sin is a naturally inheritable occurrence that does not consciously and purposefully come from any particular source
Being separated from God is what makes sin the result.

I think that the book I mentioned above does an excellent job describing the consequences of our being spiritually dead because of our sin. Ephesians 2:1.

It's not a matter of being compelled to sin at least once in our lives...
It's that we're spiritually dead and as such, incapable of doing anything BUT sin.


Ever gone to a funeral?
Ever tried sticking the guy in the casket with a pin, or something sharp?
Did they move, twitch, or flinch?
Ever tried beating a dead animal to get them to move/twitch/flinch?

In case you missed it.... dead people are completely incapable of doing anything. Period.
In like manner, the only way humans can do anything spiritual is by God's Word and the power of the Holy Spirit.
It's why we read in 1 Corinthians 1, that the preaching of the cross is the power of God to salvation.
It's why we read in Isaiah 55 that God's Word will achieve the purpose for which God gave it.

God empowers his Word to give us life. We connect with him when we believe in Jesus.

Who here agrees with this assessment?
Nope.

This is exactly why I asked you before what you're trying to impose on it.

You're doing yourself more harm than good here by twisting the truth to fit your biases.

God created Adam and Eve.
As we read in Amos, God wants godly offspring.
So he created humans to inherit their parent's DNA.
When Adam died, his humanity was irrevocably damaged.

That damage was passed from parent to child, down through the ages.

God has explicitly provided us with a solution that requires Him and his Word to initiate the solution, and sustain it throughout the rest of our lives on earth.

Failure to engage him on his terms results in retaining the old nature and upon our physical death, we will remain separated from God throughout all eternity.

Those who do engage God on his terms results in our being spiritually regenerated and made spiritually alive. This newly formed nature connects us with God.

Jesus described it in John 3 as being "born again."

It's described in a number of ways throughout the entire bible.

For me, the best description is given in Ezekiel 36:25-27.

In 1 Peter 1, we're born again by God's Word which is eternal.

In Romans 3-8, it's broken into great detail.

It's initialized by trusting Jesus and God's Word.
Once we're regenerated, we're instructed to take on a new mindset and pattern of thinking, which agrees with God's Word.
God gives us his Holy Spirit as a guarantor of our new birth, and to ensure we can learn to understand and live out the life of Jesus in our lives.

Only those who place their trust in Jesus are able to know and experience God in their lives.

No other religious beliefs possess the power to restore our connection between us and God.
 
There are segments of Christianity that deny original sin and a sin nature.

I believe they are gravely mistaken and many Scriptures clearly indicate that Adam and Eve's sin passed on to us a sin nature.

The end result of denying original sin, is to take a stand and ground that humans are inherently good, which the Bible describes as self-righteous pride, this is having the Deity owe us because our actions and attitudes are inherently meritorious.

Even if they admit they have sinned—and almost all denominations that deny OS do admit they sin—they still claim to be fundamentally good people who made a bad choice. When one points out the odds of billions of fundamentally good-natured people not having one actually live out their sinless nature seems quite strange, they simply turn a blind eye to it.

The Bible goes quite beyond that, and calls people fundamentally bad (and yes—through no fault of their own, this is the offense that brings the objection).

Verses like: There is no one good but God, in your flesh dwells no good thing, all have fallen short of the glory of God, by the works of the Law no flesh shall be justified, the Pharisees were those who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, they stumbled at the stumbling stone because they sought righteousness as if it were by works of the Law, if I rebuild what I destroyed I show myself to be a transgressor, the wicked turn astray from the womb, and on and on.

I'm not denying they attempt to reintepret these verses in a self-righteous way, but it seems to me quite impossible to convincingly do that, and almost all original sin deniers will also admit it is impossible to keep the Law and be sinless, which logically equates to the same thing as a sinful nature without them seeming to realize it.
I agree that we have what Christian would call a "sinful" nature, but it is not biblical to say we inherited it from the fall from which the entire concept of original sin is derived. Genesis was very specific about what the effect of Adam's disobedience was and a sinful nature was not part of it. The nature to disobey God's will (to sin) was obviously already present in us from creation. Paul had no scriptural warrant to claim what he did in Romans 5:12.
 
Myself and my Christian interlocutor agree that it is utterly impossible for any human being on earth to live a perfectly sinless life

Each of us, we agree, are inevitably compelled to sin at least once due to our corrupted natures

However, whereas I ascribe our corrupted natures to a decision made by YHVH/Jesus Christ, my 'esteemed' colleague contends that a corrupt nature that inevitably compels sin is a naturally inheritable occurrence that does not consciously and purposefully come from any particular source

Who here agrees with this assessment?
Point of information here: Jesus did not form the flesh nature of man according to scripture.

Nature is YHWH’s realm and inner illumination or light is Jesus’ (Holy Spirit’s) realm. (1)

(Gen 2:4 - 5:18) Generation of the material world and our flesh nature
”then the YHWH Elohim formed the man of dust from the ground” (Gen 2:7)

(Gen 1:1 - 2:4) Generation of light. Each day created by Holy Spirit results in, “there was morning” —the light breaking upon the darkness, until the Last Day when his work is complete.

Therefore, I would not attribute our flesh nature to Jesus. On the contrary, he is arguably trying to remedy it by illuminating man’s intellect with a moral consciousness.

When did sinful nature begin?
Probably at or before the Big Bang, when our material nature began. (2) Supposedly, the the Adversary was around “heaven” BEFORE man was created. The devil is sometimes attributed to be “Lord of matter”, and “God of this [material] world.” Hmmm….
——
1) “For God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” (2 cor 4:6)

2) Hydrogen atoms that make up water and our blood in the universe were formed at the Big Bang.
 
Last edited:
Nobody, I reckon. I don't think I had a "corrupt nature" at birth. I did live in a corrupt world and it quickly rubbed off on me, especially when I reached puberty.
Do you believe that each and every human being - past, present, and future {Jesus Christ notwithstanding} - is compelled, inevitably, to sin at least once?
 
I guess I don't agree with either assessment.

If I assume YHVH exists for the purposes of discussion, and further, that He is being accurately represented in these forums by the people who believe He exists - then I suppose I could get behind your POV in this thread's first post. YHVH will have created us with corruptible natures because He wanted to.

However, I don't normally make these assumptions.

As far as your colleague's POV goes, as long as I make the above assumptions, I disagree with it completely. God designed us to be flawed, and therefore, the flaws which arise are ultimately His responsibility.
 
Back
Top