Question: Psalm 51:5 'Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.' If i dun make a conscious effort to sin BUT automatically declared sinner from birth, why am I not aumatically declared a Justified Christian from birth (as opposed to NOW that we need to make a conscious effort to repent)?
Dave: God declares us as righteous (justifies) on the basis of Christ's sacrifice alone. But it has to be through the means of our faith. We have to 'accept Christ as Savior and Lord' to be justified. (Not Automatic)
But we are declared as 'sinner' because of the sin of Adam and Eve. It's 'automatic', without us having to consciously sin.
There seems to be a difference here - we are not automatically justified, but why are we automatically declared 'sinners'?
Just some half-baked thoughts festering on my mind here...
There seems to be a confusion of 'original sin' versus 'original guilt'. Wayne Grudem discussed the differences in his "Systematic theology".
As I understand it, original sin refers to the 'sinful nature' or the inclination to sin that we all have (automatically). Could it be that Psalm 51 refers to 'original sin'?
(Though we have to be careful about the poetic elements in the Psalm, it may not
necessarily be a precise theological treatise)
We 'automatically' inherit the sinful nature just as we 'automatically' receive
a regenerated nature by the renewal of the Holy Spirit. Meaning, the Holy Spirit
sovereignly gives us a new heart of flesh so that we'd be set free to believe
and love Christ as Who He is.
(OK, here I'm assuming the Reformed position that regeneration comes BEFORE faith, bcos I dun wanna go into the Calvinism/Arminianism thingy now)
What about 'original guilt'?
Original guilt does not refer to the sinful nature, but our guilty status
because of Adam's sin. Are we declared as 'guilty' automatically?
Well, I'm not so sure.
One thing for sure, though, the Bible always tells us that God will judge or condemn sinners, only on the basis of what they actually do or don't do. We're not told that judgement is based on what they potentially could do.
That's why I believe God could directly/automatically justify babies or retarded people who do not have the mental capacity to believe, even though they have a sinful nature. Simply bcos they have yet to actualise the inclination to sin in real, rebellious acts, thus incurring 'guilt'.
So, IMHO, 'guilt' is something that we get when we actualise our potential to sin (our depraved nature) into actual sins. It's not automatic.
In the same token, justification is also something that we receive through the empty hands of faith. It's also not automatic.
Does that make sense? So basically I'm saying we do automatically get a sinful nature just as we are regenerated through no actions of our own.
But in order to be guilty, we have to actualise that nature's potential. Just as to be declared righteous before God, we have to actualise the regenerated nature's potential to see and savor Christ.
Dave: God declares us as righteous (justifies) on the basis of Christ's sacrifice alone. But it has to be through the means of our faith. We have to 'accept Christ as Savior and Lord' to be justified. (Not Automatic)
But we are declared as 'sinner' because of the sin of Adam and Eve. It's 'automatic', without us having to consciously sin.
There seems to be a difference here - we are not automatically justified, but why are we automatically declared 'sinners'?
Just some half-baked thoughts festering on my mind here...
There seems to be a confusion of 'original sin' versus 'original guilt'. Wayne Grudem discussed the differences in his "Systematic theology".
As I understand it, original sin refers to the 'sinful nature' or the inclination to sin that we all have (automatically). Could it be that Psalm 51 refers to 'original sin'?
(Though we have to be careful about the poetic elements in the Psalm, it may not
necessarily be a precise theological treatise)
We 'automatically' inherit the sinful nature just as we 'automatically' receive
a regenerated nature by the renewal of the Holy Spirit. Meaning, the Holy Spirit
sovereignly gives us a new heart of flesh so that we'd be set free to believe
and love Christ as Who He is.
(OK, here I'm assuming the Reformed position that regeneration comes BEFORE faith, bcos I dun wanna go into the Calvinism/Arminianism thingy now)
What about 'original guilt'?
Original guilt does not refer to the sinful nature, but our guilty status
because of Adam's sin. Are we declared as 'guilty' automatically?
Well, I'm not so sure.
One thing for sure, though, the Bible always tells us that God will judge or condemn sinners, only on the basis of what they actually do or don't do. We're not told that judgement is based on what they potentially could do.
That's why I believe God could directly/automatically justify babies or retarded people who do not have the mental capacity to believe, even though they have a sinful nature. Simply bcos they have yet to actualise the inclination to sin in real, rebellious acts, thus incurring 'guilt'.
So, IMHO, 'guilt' is something that we get when we actualise our potential to sin (our depraved nature) into actual sins. It's not automatic.
In the same token, justification is also something that we receive through the empty hands of faith. It's also not automatic.
Does that make sense? So basically I'm saying we do automatically get a sinful nature just as we are regenerated through no actions of our own.
But in order to be guilty, we have to actualise that nature's potential. Just as to be declared righteous before God, we have to actualise the regenerated nature's potential to see and savor Christ.
Comments