Data on John 1:1

Thank you, brother. There are a few points I might see differently, but I don’t want to overwhelm you, especially with others joining in.

Stay strong in Christ Jesus.

J.
This is my field and so I can handle your points that you see different. I cannot be overwhelmed since I believe myself to be an expert in this field.
 
Why should I use the REV?
When I tell John or his partners that co-write with him that I'm sharing their content with many online. They say they are happy I'm doing so. Or they say good for you. Or they say that's great that you're getting the Word out to people. None of them say be sure to put our name on what you post so God will know. They do not say it can only be the truth if you say that you did not personally write it. They or me don't care who wrote it on paper. We only care that the truth can be shared. However, you don't look at what we write be it they or me. You look at the person who wrote it or posted it and attack the messenger and not the content.
 
@Johann
TomL said:
And the One lord of

Deuteronomy 6:4 (KJV 1900) — 4 Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: (echad YHWH -Hebrew)

Mark 12:29 (KJV 1900) — 29 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: (heis Kyrios)

is Jesus according to

1 Corinthians 8:6 (KJV 1900) — 6 But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord (heis Kyrios) Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.

Johann SAID, Irrefutable.

J.


IF Irrefutable, ONE QUESTION. " Who made all things?". John 1:3 "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made."
NOW THIS,
Isaiah 44:24 "Thus saith the LORD, thy redeemer, and he that formed thee from the womb, I am the LORD that maketh all things; that stretcheth forth the heavens alone; that spreadeth abroad the earth by myself;"

is the Person in John 1:1 the same one person in Isaiah 44:24? remember before you answer, the Person in Isaiah 44:24 said he was "ALONE", and by himself. please note, "ALONE" means, having no one else present. meaning there was no one else to go through. your answer please.

101G.
P.S. this not a right or wrong question, but to arrest your attention.
God created all things through the son

The one who employed the agent and the agent that is two
 
Who has a poor theological knowledge-? @Peterlag?

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202 AD)
View on Original Sin: Irenaeus emphasized Adam's fall as humanity's introduction to sin and mortality but did not articulate a doctrine of inherited guilt.
Transmission: He suggested that humanity inherits a weakened nature due to Adam’s disobedience, making people inclined to sin. However, each individual remains responsible for their own sins.
Key Works: Against Heresies—Irenaeus stresses that Adam's disobedience was corrected through Christ's obedience, underscoring the concept of recapitulation (Christ as the new Adam), rather than hereditary guilt.

2. Tertullian (c. 155–240 AD)
View on Original Sin: Tertullian taught that the human soul is tainted by Adam’s sin, describing the transmission as a “seminal” principle, though he did not insist on a strict guilt inheritance.
Transmission: His concept of tradux animae (soul transfusion) implies that both body and soul are transmitted by parents, hence carrying Adam's sinful nature.
Key Works: On the Soul—where he theorizes that original sin is passed through human generation, marking a proto-view of inherited sinfulness.

3. Origen of Alexandria (c. 184–253 AD)
View on Original Sin: Origen believed that sin affects all of humanity due to Adam, yet each soul has pre-existence and retains moral responsibility.
Transmission: He held that every soul is affected by Adam's sin but is born free to make choices. He did not adopt a concept of guilt transmitted from Adam.
Key Works: On First Principles—Origen posits that souls inherit a weakened state but remain individually responsible for their actions, rejecting hereditary guilt.

4. Cyprian of Carthage (c. 200–258 AD)
View on Original Sin: Cyprian believed that all are born with a corrupt nature, hence his advocacy for infant baptism, not because of guilt per se but to cleanse the inherited sinful condition.
Transmission: Cyprian implied a need for baptism to renew the individual from Adam's fallen nature, though without explicit language on guilt.
Key Works: Letter to Fidus—Cyprian argues for the practice of baptizing infants to cleanse them from the “sin of Adam.”

5. Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373 AD)
View on Original Sin: Athanasius did not directly discuss original sin as inherited guilt but emphasized humanity’s corrupted nature and mortality as consequences of the Fall.
Transmission: He believed that through Adam, humanity became subject to corruption and death, which Christ's incarnation and resurrection aimed to restore.
Key Works: On the Incarnation—he asserts that Christ’s work restores the image of God, countering the mortality introduced by Adam’s sin.

6. Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335–395 AD)
View on Original Sin: Gregory saw Adam’s sin as introducing mortality and a tendency toward sin, viewing original sin more as a corrupted state than inherited guilt.
Transmission: He argued that humanity inherited a mortal condition from Adam, which predisposes people to sin rather than transmitting specific guilt.
Key Works: The Great Catechism—Gregory emphasizes that Adam’s fall impacts human nature primarily by inclining it toward sin and death, with each individual’s responsibility upheld.

7. John Chrysostom (c. 349–407 AD)
View on Original Sin: Chrysostom rejected the notion that Adam’s guilt is transferred to all humans, focusing instead on mortality and corruption inherited through Adam’s sin.
Transmission: He believed in an inherited corruption affecting human nature but maintained that each person sins by their own choice, rejecting inherited guilt.
Key Works: Homilies on Romans—where Chrysostom interprets Romans 5 as teaching death and a sinful tendency rather than guilt passed from Adam to all.

8. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD)
View on Original Sin: Augustine systematized the doctrine, asserting that Adam’s sin imparted both a sinful nature and guilt to all humans. His view laid the foundation for Western Christianity’s understanding of original sin.
Transmission: Augustine believed original sin, both guilt and sinful nature, is transmitted through human procreation, requiring baptism for salvation.
Key Works: Confessions, On Original Sin, City of God—where he articulates a view that humanity inherits Adam's guilt and corruption, centralizing baptism as necessary for cleansing original sin.
Summary

Before Augustine, the Church Fathers generally agreed that Adam’s sin introduced a condition of mortality, corruption, and an inclination to sin. However, most, including Irenaeus, Origen, and Chrysostom, did not articulate the concept of inherited guilt. Instead, they emphasized a transmission of weakened or corrupted nature rather than individual guilt. Augustine’s articulation marked a distinct development, suggesting that both guilt and a sinful nature are inherited, which became foundational in Western Christianity's doctrinal structure.

What do you think, @praise_yeshua? Is the doctrine of original sin actually unbiblical? I’ve come across a lengthy argument claiming it doesn't have a basis in Scripture.

J.
I looked up the word "sin" in most of the places it's used in the epistles and in 4 hours wrote about it. The following is part of what I wrote...

The New Testament epistles have words like
"remission of sins" and "sins may be blotted out" and "the forgiveness of sins" and "wash away thy sins" and "whose sins are covered" and "impute sin" and "are dead to sin" and "condemned sin in the flesh" and "take away their sins" and "Christ died for our sins" and "purged our sins..." The book of Romans begins talking about Jews and Gentiles being both under sin and this should not be anything new to us since both are still broken without the spirit of God. And yet for some mysterious reason I live on a planet where many Christians think their flesh is justified by the deeds of the law even after the book of Romans tells us plainly that everyone except the Christian is under sin (Romans 3:20 says Jews and Gentiles).

Romans tell us
"sin is not imputed when there is no law" and "that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." And then there's verse 7 with "For he that is dead is freed from sin." I never understood Romans 6 because I was taught that I was a sinner saved by grace. Let's look at what Romans is saying: Christ died unto sin once and now he lives unto God. How are we who are still alive going to be able to likewise reckon ourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God? It seems to me it must be done through Jesus Christ our Lord. It's not about us or our broken selves. It's him we must function in. Here's the verse "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord."

It appears both Catholic and Protestant churches do not teach that
"sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." Nor do they teach "For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness." And so "Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." I'm going to skip over Romans 7 because it tells us right up at the top of the chapter that Paul is talking to those who are into or know the law. And then the context of the whole chapter is how we can see it's all about Israel and their Law and how they toy with their flesh.

What Paul talks about in the seventh chapter of Romans is what occurs to the believer who still thinks the Law applies to them. They end up spiritually dying by the commandment and realize that the commandment does not produce life. The war is with their flesh because they are still believing the Law has power over them. In the eighth chapter of Romans is where it explains how we over come this whole issue by living in the spirit and being dead to the Law. We cannot live by faith in what Christ has done for us and still think our obedience to written laws are necessary. To do so takes away from the perfect work of Christ and places salvation and righteousness back in our own hands. Romans 8 states
"the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin..."

The verse in 2 Corinthians 5:21, is talking about the
"righteousness of God in him." It's the "in him" that nobody seems to be able to understand. This whole thing functions "in him." It's in Christ and therefore in the new nature that is mentioned just a few verses above this in verse 17 where it says "new creature:" It's not that we do not sin in our old man nature. It's that we do not sin in the new man that we are told to put on. The churches have destroyed this idea by teaching we put on the new man by following the teachings of Jesus as we walk in our flesh. So this is a lost art.

In the book of Colossians, we read
"putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:" We did not put it off. It was the circumcision of Christ. Two verses later we read "together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;..." Again, it's "in him" or "with him." I also want to get the book of Hebrews in here where we see Christ offered himself once "for this he did once" and not like the high priest who offered up the sacrifice daily. The Lord Christ "after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;..."

Peter has the same mindset as Paul when he writes in 1 Peter
"that we, being dead to sins,..." Peter goes on to say that Christ suffered once for sins so as to bring us to God, and so this is why the Scripture reads "being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:" Again, the old man crucified and the new man put in its place. Peter again, "ceased from sin;..." Put that mindset on or as Peter writes "arm yourself likewise with the same mind:" Because he that has suffered in the flesh or was crucified in the flesh has put on the new man because the other one is dead. That new person "hath ceased from sin;..."

The last verse I'm going to mention has
"in him" again. From 1 John we read "that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin." We cannot sin in him because there's no sin in him and this is why "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."
 
His Christ is nothing but a man
God knows the heart
2 Timothy 2:19
"Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity."

This verse affirms that God’s foundation is unshakable, sealed by His knowledge of those who belong to Him, calling them to live in righteousness.
1 Samuel 16:7
"But the Lord said to Samuel, ‘Do not look at his appearance or at his physical stature, because I have refused him. For the Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart.’"

God distinguishes between outward appearances and the true state of the heart, revealing His depth of insight into human nature.
John 10:14
"I am the good shepherd, and I know My sheep, and am known by My own."

Jesus, the Good Shepherd, confirms His intimate knowledge of His followers, reflecting God’s deep, personal relationship with those who belong to Him.
Jeremiah 17:10
"I, the Lord, search the heart, I test the mind, even to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his doings."

Here, God reveals His role as the examiner of the heart and mind, rewarding each person according to their true nature.
John 10:27
"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me."

Jesus affirms that He recognizes His own sheep, and they in turn respond to His voice, illustrating the mutual recognition between God and His people.
Psalm 139:1-2
"O Lord, You have searched me and known me. You know my sitting down and my rising up; You understand my thought afar off."

David praises God’s comprehensive knowledge of his every action, thought, and desire, celebrating God’s intimate awareness of each person’s life.
Nahum 1:7
"The Lord is good, a stronghold in the day of trouble; and He knows those who trust in Him."

God’s knowledge of those who seek refuge in Him serves as a promise of protection and a reminder that He knows each believer who genuinely trusts in Him.
Romans 8:27
"Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God."

This verse reveals that God, who searches hearts, works closely with the Spirit to intercede for believers, demonstrating His deep knowledge of each one.
Psalm 1:6
"For the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish."

God’s intimate knowledge of the righteous assures them of His guidance and protection, contrasting sharply with the fate of the ungodly.
Exodus 33:17
"So the Lord said to Moses, ‘I will also do this thing that you have spoken; for you have found grace in My sight, and I know you by name.’"

God’s assurance to Moses, whom He knows personally by name, symbolizes His recognition and acceptance of those who belong to Him.

I've returned to BAM not to gang up on others or to judge anyone's salvation. My own theology and soteriology aren’t fully settled, and I don't think any of us can claim to have it all figured out.

It’s a learning process-a journey that takes a lifetime, @TomL.

J.
 
Last edited:
Who has a poor theological knowledge-? @Peterlag?

Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202 AD)
View on Original Sin: Irenaeus emphasized Adam's fall as humanity's introduction to sin and mortality but did not articulate a doctrine of inherited guilt.
Transmission: He suggested that humanity inherits a weakened nature due to Adam’s disobedience, making people inclined to sin. However, each individual remains responsible for their own sins.
Key Works: Against Heresies—Irenaeus stresses that Adam's disobedience was corrected through Christ's obedience, underscoring the concept of recapitulation (Christ as the new Adam), rather than hereditary guilt.

2. Tertullian (c. 155–240 AD)
View on Original Sin: Tertullian taught that the human soul is tainted by Adam’s sin, describing the transmission as a “seminal” principle, though he did not insist on a strict guilt inheritance.
Transmission: His concept of tradux animae (soul transfusion) implies that both body and soul are transmitted by parents, hence carrying Adam's sinful nature.
Key Works: On the Soul—where he theorizes that original sin is passed through human generation, marking a proto-view of inherited sinfulness.

3. Origen of Alexandria (c. 184–253 AD)
View on Original Sin: Origen believed that sin affects all of humanity due to Adam, yet each soul has pre-existence and retains moral responsibility.
Transmission: He held that every soul is affected by Adam's sin but is born free to make choices. He did not adopt a concept of guilt transmitted from Adam.
Key Works: On First Principles—Origen posits that souls inherit a weakened state but remain individually responsible for their actions, rejecting hereditary guilt.

4. Cyprian of Carthage (c. 200–258 AD)
View on Original Sin: Cyprian believed that all are born with a corrupt nature, hence his advocacy for infant baptism, not because of guilt per se but to cleanse the inherited sinful condition.
Transmission: Cyprian implied a need for baptism to renew the individual from Adam's fallen nature, though without explicit language on guilt.
Key Works: Letter to Fidus—Cyprian argues for the practice of baptizing infants to cleanse them from the “sin of Adam.”

5. Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373 AD)
View on Original Sin: Athanasius did not directly discuss original sin as inherited guilt but emphasized humanity’s corrupted nature and mortality as consequences of the Fall.
Transmission: He believed that through Adam, humanity became subject to corruption and death, which Christ's incarnation and resurrection aimed to restore.
Key Works: On the Incarnation—he asserts that Christ’s work restores the image of God, countering the mortality introduced by Adam’s sin.

6. Gregory of Nyssa (c. 335–395 AD)
View on Original Sin: Gregory saw Adam’s sin as introducing mortality and a tendency toward sin, viewing original sin more as a corrupted state than inherited guilt.
Transmission: He argued that humanity inherited a mortal condition from Adam, which predisposes people to sin rather than transmitting specific guilt.
Key Works: The Great Catechism—Gregory emphasizes that Adam’s fall impacts human nature primarily by inclining it toward sin and death, with each individual’s responsibility upheld.

7. John Chrysostom (c. 349–407 AD)
View on Original Sin: Chrysostom rejected the notion that Adam’s guilt is transferred to all humans, focusing instead on mortality and corruption inherited through Adam’s sin.
Transmission: He believed in an inherited corruption affecting human nature but maintained that each person sins by their own choice, rejecting inherited guilt.
Key Works: Homilies on Romans—where Chrysostom interprets Romans 5 as teaching death and a sinful tendency rather than guilt passed from Adam to all.

8. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 AD)
View on Original Sin: Augustine systematized the doctrine, asserting that Adam’s sin imparted both a sinful nature and guilt to all humans. His view laid the foundation for Western Christianity’s understanding of original sin.
Transmission: Augustine believed original sin, both guilt and sinful nature, is transmitted through human procreation, requiring baptism for salvation.
Key Works: Confessions, On Original Sin, City of God—where he articulates a view that humanity inherits Adam's guilt and corruption, centralizing baptism as necessary for cleansing original sin.
Summary

Before Augustine, the Church Fathers generally agreed that Adam’s sin introduced a condition of mortality, corruption, and an inclination to sin. However, most, including Irenaeus, Origen, and Chrysostom, did not articulate the concept of inherited guilt. Instead, they emphasized a transmission of weakened or corrupted nature rather than individual guilt. Augustine’s articulation marked a distinct development, suggesting that both guilt and a sinful nature are inherited, which became foundational in Western Christianity's doctrinal structure.

What do you think, @praise_yeshua? Is the doctrine of original sin actually unbiblical? I’ve come across a lengthy argument claiming it doesn't have a basis in Scripture.

J.
So where did you get this information from? Take one person, say Irenaeus....

Prove what you just stated as fact from their own words.
 
The New Testament epistles have words like "remission of sins" and "sins may be blotted out" and "the forgiveness of sins" and "wash away thy sins" and "whose sins are covered" and "impute sin" and "are dead to sin" and "condemned sin in the flesh" and "take away their sins" and "Christ died for our sins" and "purged our sins..." The book of Romans begins talking about Jews and Gentiles being both under sin and this should not be anything new to us since both are still broken without the spirit of God. And yet for some mysterious reason I live on a planet where many Christians think their flesh is justified by the deeds of the law even after the book of Romans tells us plainly that everyone except the Christian is under sin (Romans 3:20 says Jews and Gentiles).
Let's see--

Remission, Forgiveness, and Cleansing of Sins
Phrases like “remission of sins” (ἄφεσις ἁμαρτιῶν), “blotted out” (ἐξαλειφθῶσιν), “forgiveness” (ἄφεσις), and “washing away of sins” (ἀπόλουσαι τὰς ἁμαρτίας) are indeed biblically based. These terms appear in contexts such as Acts 2:38, Hebrews 10:17-18, Ephesians 1:7, and Acts 22:16, where they highlight God’s forgiveness and the believer's cleansing through faith in Jesus Christ.

Jew and Gentile Under Sin
Romans chapters 1 through 3 focus on the universality of sin, stating that both Jews and Gentiles are “under sin” (Romans 3:9), and Paul concludes that no one is righteous through their works. Romans 3:20 specifically states that “by the works of the law, no flesh will be justified” (οὐ δικαιωθήσεται πᾶσα σάρξ ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ), affirming that salvation cannot be achieved through adherence to the Mosaic Law. This is a core message of Paul’s theology, emphasizing justification through faith in Jesus alone (Romans 3:21-22).

The Role of the Flesh and the Law
The phrase “many Christians think their flesh is justified by the deeds of the law” might not fully capture the New Testament teaching on the believer’s relationship to the flesh and the law. Paul often contrasts “flesh” (σάρξ) and “Spirit” (πνεῦμα) to indicate the life before and after receiving Christ (e.g., Romans 8:1-4). For believers, the righteousness they possess comes from faith and is empowered by the Holy Spirit, not from any capacity of the flesh or works of the law (Galatians 2:16). Therefore, Christians are not justified by the law, but by faith-a distinction Paul stresses repeatedly.

Christians and the Condition of Sin
While the phrase “everyone except the Christian is under sin” attempts to reflect the believer’s redeemed status, it is nuanced in Scripture.

Believers, though redeemed, still wrestle with sin (see Romans 7:14-25) and are in a transformative process, yet they are no longer condemned as they “walk according to the Spirit” (Romans 8:1-2). So, while Christians are justified and no longer slaves to sin, they are called to actively live out righteousness by the Spirit’s power, showing that their position in Christ is one of freedom from the “dominion” of sin (Romans 6:14).


However, a biblical view should clarify that Christians, though justified and led by the Spirit, still face the ongoing process of
sanctification and are not entirely free from the influence of sin in this life. Paul’s writings emphasize that believers are not justified by fleshly works or the law but are saved through faith, marked by the Spirit, and are gradually being conformed to Christ’s image.

J.
 
When I tell John or his partners that co-write with him that I'm sharing their content with many online. They say they are happy I'm doing so. Or they say good for you. Or they say that's great that you're getting the Word out to people. None of them say be sure to put our name on what you post so God will know. They do not say it can only be the truth if you say that you did not personally write it. They or me don't care who wrote it on paper. We only care that the truth can be shared. However, you don't look at what we write be it they or me. You look at the person who wrote it or posted it and attack the messenger and not the content.
I asked about the REV and you claim I attack you personally? The REV is a ridiculously plagiarized edition slightly modified to support your position. That is evil. It is just fact. You're not speaking for yourself, you're just repeating others.
 
So where did you get this information from? Take one person, say Irenaeus....

Prove what you just stated as fact from their own words.
John Chrysostom (c. 349–407 AD)
View on Original Sin: Chrysostom rejected the notion that Adam’s guilt is transferred to all humans, focusing instead on mortality and corruption inherited through Adam’s sin.
Transmission: He believed in an inherited corruption affecting human nature but maintained that each person sins by their own choice, rejecting inherited guilt.
Key Works: Homilies on Romans—where Chrysostom interprets Romans 5 as teaching death and a sinful tendency rather than guilt passed from Adam to all.

Where is he wrong?

Type in Google search-The writings of the ECF's.

J.
 
I looked up the word "sin" in most of the places it's used in the epistles and in 4 hours wrote about it. The following is part of what I wrote...

The New Testament epistles have words like
"remission of sins" and "sins may be blotted out" and "the forgiveness of sins" and "wash away thy sins" and "whose sins are covered" and "impute sin" and "are dead to sin" and "condemned sin in the flesh" and "take away their sins" and "Christ died for our sins" and "purged our sins..." The book of Romans begins talking about Jews and Gentiles being both under sin and this should not be anything new to us since both are still broken without the spirit of God. And yet for some mysterious reason I live on a planet where many Christians think their flesh is justified by the deeds of the law even after the book of Romans tells us plainly that everyone except the Christian is under sin (Romans 3:20 says Jews and Gentiles).

Romans tell us
"sin is not imputed when there is no law" and "that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." And then there's verse 7 with "For he that is dead is freed from sin." I never understood Romans 6 because I was taught that I was a sinner saved by grace. Let's look at what Romans is saying: Christ died unto sin once and now he lives unto God. How are we who are still alive going to be able to likewise reckon ourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God? It seems to me it must be done through Jesus Christ our Lord. It's not about us or our broken selves. It's him we must function in. Here's the verse "Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord."

It appears both Catholic and Protestant churches do not teach that "sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace." Nor do they teach "For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness." And so "Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." I'm going to skip over Romans 7 because it tells us right up at the top of the chapter that Paul is talking to those who are into or know the law. And then the context of the whole chapter is how we can see it's all about Israel and their Law and how they toy with their flesh.

What Paul talks about in the seventh chapter of Romans is what occurs to the believer who still thinks the Law applies to them. They end up spiritually dying by the commandment and realize that the commandment does not produce life. The war is with their flesh because they are still believing the Law has power over them. In the eighth chapter of Romans is where it explains how we over come this whole issue by living in the spirit and being dead to the Law. We cannot live by faith in what Christ has done for us and still think our obedience to written laws are necessary. To do so takes away from the perfect work of Christ and places salvation and righteousness back in our own hands. Romans 8 states
"the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin..."

The verse in 2 Corinthians 5:21, is talking about the "righteousness of God in him." It's the "in him" that nobody seems to be able to understand. This whole thing functions "in him." It's in Christ and therefore in the new nature that is mentioned just a few verses above this in verse 17 where it says "new creature:" It's not that we do not sin in our old man nature. It's that we do not sin in the new man that we are told to put on. The churches have destroyed this idea by teaching we put on the new man by following the teachings of Jesus as we walk in our flesh. So this is a lost art.

In the book of Colossians, we read
"putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:" We did not put it off. It was the circumcision of Christ. Two verses later we read "together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;..." Again, it's "in him" or "with him." I also want to get the book of Hebrews in here where we see Christ offered himself once "for this he did once" and not like the high priest who offered up the sacrifice daily. The Lord Christ "after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;..."

Peter has the same mindset as Paul when he writes in 1 Peter "that we, being dead to sins,..." Peter goes on to say that Christ suffered once for sins so as to bring us to God, and so this is why the Scripture reads "being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:" Again, the old man crucified and the new man put in its place. Peter again, "ceased from sin;..." Put that mindset on or as Peter writes "arm yourself likewise with the same mind:" Because he that has suffered in the flesh or was crucified in the flesh has put on the new man because the other one is dead. That new person "hath ceased from sin;..."

The last verse I'm going to mention has "in him" again. From 1 John we read "that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin." We cannot sin in him because there's no sin in him and this is why "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."
The Englishman's Concordance is an excellent source.

J.
 
John Chrysostom (c. 349–407 AD)
View on Original Sin: Chrysostom rejected the notion that Adam’s guilt is transferred to all humans, focusing instead on mortality and corruption inherited through Adam’s sin.
Transmission: He believed in an inherited corruption affecting human nature but maintained that each person sins by their own choice, rejecting inherited guilt.
Key Works: Homilies on Romans—where Chrysostom interprets Romans 5 as teaching death and a sinful tendency rather than guilt passed from Adam to all.

Where is he wrong?

Type in Google search-The writings of the ECF's.

J.
He is not wrong

Ezekiel 18:2–4 (KJV 1900) — 2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge? 3 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Ezekiel 18:20 (KJV 1900) — 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (KJV 1900) — 16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Kings 14:6 (KJV 1900) — 6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Chronicles 25:4 (KJV 1900) — 4 But he slew not their children, but did as it is written in the law in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.
 
He is not wrong

Ezekiel 18:2–4 (KJV 1900) — 2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge? 3 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Ezekiel 18:20 (KJV 1900) — 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (KJV 1900) — 16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Kings 14:6 (KJV 1900) — 6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Chronicles 25:4 (KJV 1900) — 4 But he slew not their children, but did as it is written in the law in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.
The notion that Adam's guilt is transferred to all humans, often referred to as "original sin," is a theological concept that has been debated since the early church. John Chrysostom, one of the early Church Fathers, rejected this idea, arguing instead for a view that emphasized individual responsibility for sin rather than a blanket inheritance of Adam’s guilt.

Key Biblical Texts
Romans 5:12-21 (NKJV)

Verse 12: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned.”
Greek Syntax: The Greek word for "sinned" (ἥμαρτον, hēmarton) in the aorist tense suggests a completed action. This verse implies that all humanity sinned in Adam but does not explicitly state that Adam's guilt is imputed to all.
Tense Consideration: The aorist tense indicates that the action (sinning) occurred at a point in time, reflecting individual acts of sin rather than a blanket transfer of guilt.

Ezekiel 18:20 (NKJV)

“The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”

Hebrew Syntax: The phrase "shall not bear the guilt" (לֹא יִשָּׂא בְּעָוֹן) uses the verb נָשָׂא (nasa), which means “to bear” or “to carry.” The negation emphasizes individual accountability and explicitly refutes the concept of inherited guilt from Adam to subsequent generations.

James 1:14-15 (NKJV)

“But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.”

Greek Syntax: The verbs used here (ἐλκύει, elkyei for “is drawn away” and συλλαμβάνει, syllambanei for “conceives”) are in the present tense, indicating ongoing actions and personal responsibility for sin.

Theological Context
Chrysostom’s View: Chrysostom emphasized the notion of free will and personal responsibility. He argued that each person is accountable for their own sins rather than being burdened by Adam’s guilt. This aligns with the principles outlined in Ezekiel, asserting individual responsibility in matters of righteousness and sin.

The biblical texts examined, particularly Romans 5:12-21 and Ezekiel 18:20, support the understanding that while sin entered the world through Adam, individuals are accountable for their own actions. The Greek and Hebrew tenses used in these verses highlight personal responsibility rather than the imposition of Adam's guilt onto all humanity. Chrysostom’s rejection of inherited guilt resonates with the emphasis on individual accountability found in Scripture, making a compelling argument against the notion of original sin as the transfer of guilt from Adam to all descendants.

It seems you are correct if we maintain consistency with the text.

J.
 
He is not wrong

Ezekiel 18:2–4 (KJV 1900) — 2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge? 3 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Ezekiel 18:20 (KJV 1900) — 20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (KJV 1900) — 16 The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Kings 14:6 (KJV 1900) — 6 But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Chronicles 25:4 (KJV 1900) — 4 But he slew not their children, but did as it is written in the law in the book of Moses, where the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not die for the children, neither shall the children die for the fathers, but every man shall die for his own sin.
So mortality and corruption inherited through Adam’s sin is biblical-right?


Powerful sermon.

J.
 
John Chrysostom (c. 349–407 AD)
View on Original Sin: Chrysostom rejected the notion that Adam’s guilt is transferred to all humans, focusing instead on mortality and corruption inherited through Adam’s sin.
Transmission: He believed in an inherited corruption affecting human nature but maintained that each person sins by their own choice, rejecting inherited guilt.
Key Works: Homilies on Romans—where Chrysostom interprets Romans 5 as teaching death and a sinful tendency rather than guilt passed from Adam to all.

Where is he wrong?

Type in Google search-The writings of the ECF's.

J.

I don't accept what Google says about someone else without reading their own words. Google lies. So do many so called historians who were hundreds of years removed from when they lived. That is why I asked you to give me their own words. Most people will lie to you about what I've said much less someone from the first/second century. Quote them. Also, make sure you translate their words yourself.

Maybe explain the difference between first sin and original sin?
 
Back
Top Bottom