Friday, October 12, 2012

Sin Nature

Many doctrines have invented terms that are nonexistent in the Bible. Like the term total depravity. You won’t find that anywhere in the Bible. Nor does the word “sinful” ever appear with the word “nature”, as in "sinful nature". In fact, every use of the word “nature” in scripture, the opposite is implied. 

For instance, the Bible says in Romans 1:26-27  "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet."

This verse makes it utterly clear that h*mose*uality (that God calls abominable) is contrary to nature. It's a choice, like every other sin. 
Charles Finney said, “If in fact we had a sinful nature that would be the best of all excuses for sinning." - Charles Finney 

The prevalent doctrine of "sin nature" would make sin God's fault, not mine. If we were born predisposed to sin and incapable to doing anything else, how can we possibly be responsible for something we "can't help"?  And how can we be sorry and repent for for something we are not even responsible for?  You see? Such a ridiculous, heretical, unbiblical and impossible doctrine.

Adam's sin separated him from God and all his descendants have been born likewise. Separated from God. And that makes us predisposed to independence which leads to sin. But we are not born with some kind of a fixed inclination to sin. But our flesh (our cells, skin, tissues and bones) is happy to indulge. The Bible tells us the flesh and the mind are at war. We may want one thing, but the flesh another. What you do determines who your master is. 

Adam had a desire to see things pleasant, to eat food, to be wise, gifts God gave him. And it is those very attributes that Adam exercised that led to his sin.

So if the presence of universal sin can only be explained by sinful nature, how would you explain Adam having sinned or Lucifer having sinned before that? 

Certainly there was no possibility of any kind of an evil nature being present prior to the fall.  

How would you explain the fact that Christ was tempted in all points like as we are.  Certainly he didn’t have Adam’s nature. Yet he was tempted. What was the nature of the temptation? What was in him that could be aroused to lust, to disobey God, except the body of flesh? (Look up the phrase "body of flesh" in the KJV).

Theologians teach that Christians have a two natures and that the Christian life is a struggle to conquer that alter ego, the sinful self that dwells inside. 

The Bible teaches that there is a struggle for a Christian, but the struggle is not between two inner personalities - an old Adam sinful personality and a new Christ personality. 

That’s not the struggle. The struggle in the scripture is clearly between the flesh and the spirit. 

It’s interesting that in the NIV in Romans chapter 7 and 8, they take that word, flesh (or “sarx” the greek word used 144 times and translated as the word "flesh" 143 times in the King James Bible) that one, single, short, word for flesh and translate it “sinful nature”.  Flesh is what gets burnt, gets bruised, gets cut, gets freckled, it dies, it rots, it’s buried  flesh is flesh. 

Many modern bible versions say that, “I know that in me, that is in my “sinful nature” dwelleth no good thing”.  

And that is exactly the way that fundamental Christians all down through the years have interpreted Romans 7. They think that the word flesh does not mean flesh, it means sinful nature. The fact that the King James Bible never uses the term “sinful nature" anywhere, ever, has not deterred the development of the (false) doctrine of sinful nature.  

The truth is that the doctrine doesn’t come out of the scriptures. It comes out of experience. I know in my own experience I am weak and ineffectual when it comes to dealing with sin. I know that in my own experience that sin is so easy to do. And that there’s a readiness in me to do things that are sinful.  

Before men get saved, it’s impossible in practice for him to give up his sin. Paul describes the situation in Romans 7.  Theologians say that sin dwells in my nature, but scripture says that it dwells in my flesh

Scripture is God's word. So who do you think we should believe - God or man? Men developed the idea that there are two selves: one that can only do sin and one that can only do righteousness. A truly ludicrous notion that masses of people have fallen victim to believing. They believe it because they want to. The alternative is their own responsibility and accompanying guilt.

What about justification?  Justification is the work that God did for us in Jesus Christ. There’s nothing we can ever do that contributes to our justification. But what we fail to understand is that sanctification is equally objective, equally outside of us, and equally the work of Christ —  not for us, but TO us. 

The full gospel is this: Jesus died FOR me to forgive me of my sins and I died with him to free me from it’s power.  I am free from the power of sin. I don't have to yield to it. I can say no and call on the power of God to walk away. 

So justification is the work God did IN CHRIST. 
Sancitification is the work God did IN CHRIST TO ME.  

Resting in Jesus is my joy. Trusting in all he has done, is doing and will do. It's good to be free. :) It's good to know that if I stumble (sin unintentionally) I have an advocate with the Father. Jesus, my mediator, friend and Saviour, is interceding for me and covers me. I am His forever. 

If you are reading this and you are unsure of your salvation, it is simply a matter of getting right with God.  


No comments: