Coptic Forums

The official forums of the Coptic Media Network, focusing on Coptic hymns, Orthodoxy, spirituality, friendship, and member experiences.

What was the time when Christ began to carry our sins?

Post new topic Reply to topic

1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 9  Next

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 23, 2009 - 04:42 PM

So all of us know that our Lord incarnated and came to earth to carry our sins, but exactly when did He actually begin to carry the sins of the entire world?

This question came up at a previous servants' meeting, and there were two assertions made. The first was that our Lord first began to carry our sins in the garden at Gethsemane, because that is when our Lord "began to be troubled and deeply distressed" (Mark 14:33). The other assertion was that our Lord carried the sins of the world even as a child.

Although I fully understand the point Abouna made, and that our Lord did not carry the sin of the world from His birth, but actually in the garden, I thought to open the topic here for discussion.


_________________
Grant me, O my Good Savior, that I might consider Your suffering my treasure, Your crown of thorns my glory, Your pain my happiness, Your bitterness my sweetness, Your blood my life, Your love my pride and thanksgiving. O wounds of Christ, wound me with the spear of Divine love.

He must increase, and I must decrease.

View user's profile Send private message

Truth.Seeker

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 23, 2009 - 05:55 PM

"Theoretically," since Adam started sinning, because the Logos knew He would become Incarnate and die for us. In "practice," it was once He died on the cross.

What's the reasoning behind Gethsemane? I don't think Christ was "troubled and deeply stressed" because He was going to carry our sins, I think he was "troubled and deeply stressed" because of the price of doing just that - death.

View user's profile Send private message

mikokiko

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 23, 2009 - 11:58 PM

Our Lord Jesus Christ carried the sin of the world from His very incarnation. When the Lord died on the Cross, He in that moment gave freedom from sin through grace. But from the very Birth of our Lord, He carried sin on His shoulders. This is taken from the very simple fact that He, God, became incarnated with our Human Nature, which has corruption. So He from that moment carries and has the same corrupted human nature, which He made incorrupt through the Resurrection and Crucifixion. So Christ carried the sin of the world from His very incarnation.

So long as the Lord Jesus had our human nature, He carried the sin which presides in it.

God Bless

View user's profile Send private message

Truth.Seeker

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 12:37 AM

Before going further into this, how about defining, "carry" or "carried?" Christ4Life and mikokiko, what are your definitions?

My definition is "bearing the responsibility for," since without the shedding of blood, there's no remission. So, before Christ, there was no true remission (as it wasn't proper for the blood of bulls and goats to remit sin - per Hebrews) of sins. Since there was no true remission, people, without Christ would all pay the price of their sin - eternal death.

It is the shedding of Christ's blood on the cross that makes us no longer "carry" our sin.

Are your definitions different? It seems to me that I'm focusing on the price that humans have to pay while you're focusing on the Logos emptying Himself; is this correct?

View user's profile Send private message

minasoliman

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 02:14 AM

Perhaps, He carries people's sins when He forgives them? Perhaps it's when He started His ministry after baptism and fasting?

What do the Holy Fathers say?

View user's profile Send private message

Biboboy

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 04:48 AM

Agape,

Every act that God does is part of the economy of salvation. So from the very beginning of Christ's life, when he was incarnate and took flesh, he saved us. Every miracle, every word he said, every act - all of them saved us. That's why, in our liturgical prayers, we constantly glorify him with the words: "for He [came, was baptized, was crucified, rose..] and saved us."


_________________
"Our hearts are restless until they find rest in You, Lord" (St. Augustine, Confessions, I, 1).

"Pray gently and calmly,
Chant hymns with understanding and rhythm;
Then you will soar like a young eagle
High in the heavens"
+ St. Evagrius the Solitary, On Prayer, 82.

In Christ,
Bishoy
HCOC Member

Image
+ To Protect and Preserve +

HCOC: Sing it! Live it! Love it!

Questions or comments on the copticheritage.org website? E-mail me!

View user's profile Visit poster's website Send private message

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 06:13 AM

From Biboboy:Agape,

Every act that God does is part of the economy of salvation. So from the very beginning of Christ's life, when he was incarnate and took flesh, he saved us. Every miracle, every word he said, every act - all of them saved us. That's why, in our liturgical prayers, we constantly glorify him with the words: "for He [came, was baptized, was crucified, rose..] and saved us."


Allow me to disagree with you. Let's say for argument's sake that our Lord had simply resurrected to heaven without being crucified (I was going to say died, but that does not make any theological sense). Does that mean that his act of incarnation alone is enough to save us? Absolutely not. Now, the next argument would be to say that it is all of the acts of Christ, from the beginning of his birth to His last moment on the Cross that contribute to the salvation of mankind. However, allow me to disagree with that as well.

The fact that all of the acts our Lord committed contribute to our salvation (such as circumcision, baptism, etc.), that does not mean that He carried our sins, and (in the flesh) was seen like a sinner by the Father. That is a different argument, and that is the one I am trying to make.


_________________
Grant me, O my Good Savior, that I might consider Your suffering my treasure, Your crown of thorns my glory, Your pain my happiness, Your bitterness my sweetness, Your blood my life, Your love my pride and thanksgiving. O wounds of Christ, wound me with the spear of Divine love.

He must increase, and I must decrease.

View user's profile Send private message

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 06:17 AM

From mikokiko:Our Lord Jesus Christ carried the sin of the world from His very incarnation. When the Lord died on the Cross, He in that moment gave freedom from sin through grace. But from the very Birth of our Lord, He carried sin on His shoulders. This is taken from the very simple fact that He, God, became incarnated with our Human Nature, which has corruption. So He from that moment carries and has the same corrupted human nature, which He made incorrupt through the Resurrection and Crucifixion. So Christ carried the sin of the world from His very incarnation.

So long as the Lord Jesus had our human nature, He carried the sin which presides in it.

God Bless


I have always believed that our Lord never carried the corrupted nature which we have. That corrupted nature is a result of the original sin of Adam and Eve, which He did not inherit. That is specifically why He was born of a virgin. To imply that our Lord was born with a sinful nature would be contradicting the verse, "He became like us in all things except sin." Please correct any misconceptions I may have.


_________________
Grant me, O my Good Savior, that I might consider Your suffering my treasure, Your crown of thorns my glory, Your pain my happiness, Your bitterness my sweetness, Your blood my life, Your love my pride and thanksgiving. O wounds of Christ, wound me with the spear of Divine love.

He must increase, and I must decrease.

View user's profile Send private message

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 06:20 AM

From Truth.Seeker:Before going further into this, how about defining, "carry" or "carried?" Christ4Life and mikokiko, what are your definitions?

My definition is "bearing the responsibility for," since without the shedding of blood, there's no remission. So, before Christ, there was no true remission (as it wasn't proper for the blood of bulls and goats to remit sin - per Hebrews) of sins. Since there was no true remission, people, without Christ would all pay the price of their sin - eternal death.

It is the shedding of Christ's blood on the cross that makes us no longer "carry" our sin.

Are your definitions different? It seems to me that I'm focusing on the price that humans have to pay while you're focusing on the Logos emptying Himself; is this correct?


There is no doubt (I hope) any anyone's mind that our Lord is pure and sinless, regardless of whether we are talking about the time before the incarnation or after. The point of discussion is that there is a specific time when our Lord began to feel the burden of the sin of the entire world on his shoulders; when He began to be seen (again, only in the flesh) in the eyes of the Father as a sinner.


_________________
Grant me, O my Good Savior, that I might consider Your suffering my treasure, Your crown of thorns my glory, Your pain my happiness, Your bitterness my sweetness, Your blood my life, Your love my pride and thanksgiving. O wounds of Christ, wound me with the spear of Divine love.

He must increase, and I must decrease.

View user's profile Send private message

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 06:21 AM

From minasoliman:Perhaps, He carries people's sins when He forgives them? Perhaps it's when He started His ministry after baptism and fasting?

What do the Holy Fathers say?


H.E. Metropolitan Bishoy is the one who made the argument that this time was in Gethsemane. I will explain fully why later, as I have a paper to write and it is becoming late.


_________________
Grant me, O my Good Savior, that I might consider Your suffering my treasure, Your crown of thorns my glory, Your pain my happiness, Your bitterness my sweetness, Your blood my life, Your love my pride and thanksgiving. O wounds of Christ, wound me with the spear of Divine love.

He must increase, and I must decrease.

View user's profile Send private message

mikokiko

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 09:07 AM

I agree with Bishoy...Every act in Christ's incarnation is related to every other act in one way or another. We say that part of Christ's redemption was that He suffered for us. Well, obviously I'm not going to argue that this didn't happen in His Death, but that every act leading up to the Crucifixion reflected that suffering He would experience in His Death. From the moment He was born, He had no where to be delivered but outside in the cold in a manger around animals (not in a palace fit for a King). He was even homeless: "And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head." (Matthew 8:20). The Lord Jesus was rejected and hated by His own people. He was betrayed by a best friend, denied by another, and abandoned by most of His disciples. His entire Life was One Sacrifice of Salvation offered up to the Father, on our behalf.

There is nothing that separates the Life of Christ from His Death, and that is why His Death is called life-giving. Because when we live His Crucifixion, we become alive. He lived His Death from the moment He was incarnated as a fetus in the womb of His Mother. Therefore, let's learn to live His Death now, so that we will inherit Eternal Life.

God Bless

View user's profile Send private message

sinner2

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 02:12 PM

From Christ4Life:

I have always believed that our Lord never carried the corrupted nature which we have. That corrupted nature is a result of the original sin of Adam and Eve, which He did not inherit. That is specifically why He was born of a virgin. To imply that our Lord was born with a sinful nature would be contradicting the verse, "He became like us in all things except sin." Please correct any misconceptions I may have.


Unfortunately this is not the faith of the Orthodox Church. Christ took flesh from St. Mary, the very flesh she inherited from Adam. It seems you understand the original sin in the western sense that Augustine introduced. We do not inherit a sin or guilt from a sin. Rather Adam's nature became fallen as a consequence of sin, and we inherit that same nature. If Christ did not take on our very nature and defeat the sin in it then He could not save us, He could only have saved people like Adam before the fall, of whom there were none. See St. Athanasius' "On the Incarnation", St. Cyril's, "On the Unity of Christ", and St. Severus' arguments with Julian.

View user's profile Send private message

minasoliman

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 06:44 PM

St. Severus, like St. Athanasius did not distinguish between the humanity before the Fall and after the Fall as different in creation. Only it was different in grace.

Inherently, ALL CREATION is corruptible. That is the very definition of corruptible, that which was made out of non-existence has a tendency to be pulled back to non-existence. The only way this would be prevented in mankind is union with God.

Julian's heresy was thinking there was an inherent different in human nature before and after the Fall, thus putting his beliefs in danger that Christ's human nature was never consubstantial with our's. Severus also explained that His birth from a Virgin has nothing to do with sinful nature (as Julian believed), but making Him firstborn among the saved.

So saying that Christ took our corrupt human nature doesn't mean He took a sinful human nature. He simply took a nature that was part of creation. Nevertheless, He was without sin.

Now, I agree with Bishoy that the redemptive part of Christ pretty much started with His incarnation. But the question was when He started carrying our sins, not the redemptive part. Christ's incarnation was twofold: destroying man's sins, which required a sinless God-man; and restoring theosis. Did Christ forgive sins before His ministry?

I'd be interested to read what HE Metropolitan Bishoy would say. Do you have a link?

Then again, one wonders, does it matter?

View user's profile Send private message

Truth.Seeker

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 24, 2009 - 09:55 PM

Please provide the document by H.E. Metropolitan Bishoy when you get a chance; it will definitely be edifying.

Also, I have to echo minasoliman's "Then again, one wonders, does it matter?" I bet that, even if we all agree as to the answer to this question, it will not help or hinder anyone's goal in making it to Heaven.

View user's profile Send private message

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 25, 2009 - 12:59 AM

I agree that the answer to this question can not really hinder or help any specific person's entrance to heaven. However, I do believe that a better understanding of our faith helps us spiritually.

Minasoliman, I asked my father of confession concerning the point you made, and he asserted aggressively saying, and I quote, "If someone says so [that Christ inherited the corrupted nature] he should not take Communion and he is not Christian and if not repented let him be anathema." He also said that the idea that Christ inherited the corrupted nature is the belief of the Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses. Of course, I do not mean to point these words towards you, but those are Abouna's specific words.

The corrupted nature we have is a result of the original sin of Adam and Eve. If you want, we can start another thread proving that Christ did not inherit the corrupted nature. However, I would like to have this question answered.

Unfortunately, what H.E. Metropolitan said I do not have on a tangible document. My father of confession was at a meeting with H.E. once, and they discussed this topic. I will provide a later post expressing his view.

View user's profile Send private message

Truth.Seeker

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 25, 2009 - 02:23 AM

Christ4Life,

I think the problem is in the definitions. If you look at Mina's definition, the very fact of "human nature" means corruption -- > "So saying that Christ took our corrupt human nature doesn't mean He took a sinful human nature. He simply took a nature that was part of creation."

I don't think your priest would think someone should be anathema to say that humanity is part of creation (The New Testament is very clear that the Logos emptied Himself by becoming incarnate). Your priest probably thought you were talking to him about someone born with original sin, which Christ, of course, was born without. In fact, the Fathers are unanimous in saying His humanity was like ours in all things, except sin.

Your priest thinks:

Fall --> Original Sin --> Corrupted human nature (which, can be looked at as human nature with less grace bestowed on it).

So, once you said Christ had a corrupted nature, he figured someone's saying that He had original sin. Truly, anyone who thinks thus should be excommunicated and anathema. Mina, and he can correct me if I'm wrong, merely meant that human nature, like all things created, are "corruptible," that is, non-divine.

View user's profile Send private message

minasoliman

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 25, 2009 - 07:14 AM

Dear Christ4Life,

Truth.Seeker is right. I think and hope your Father in Confession misunderstood me, which in turn you probably misunderstood me too.

Corruption can be used more than one way. To me, corruption does not mean susceptible to sin or sinful, but susceptible to created things, and in Christ's case, to human things, i.e. hunger, touch, emotions, pains and sensations, and even death. He is like us corruptible beings in all things EXCEPT sin.

God bless you.

View user's profile Send private message

mikokiko

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 25, 2009 - 06:58 PM

I am starting to get confused again. If there is anything that really confuses me theologically it is this. I just started typing a post to try to explain this issue of Corruption and Original Sin, and started realizing I was raising more questions for myself, than answering. So here are my questions: I am still having trouble defining what Original Sin is.
1. Is original sin a guilt that we inherit from Adam, for his eating the fruit of a tree?
2. Or is it simply a corruption in our humanity? If so, is it:
a) a corruption of only nature (Death, Disease, Hunger, Sleep)
b) a corruption of our moral standing with God (causing us all to be sinful: prideful, jealous, hateful etc.)
c) a corruption of a) and b)
d) a corruption only in will, or in inclination, but not in act
d) simply an inherited sin of Adam's disobedience, that we are guiltless of

Now it is said, "what is not assumed is not saved." Meaning Christ obviously had to assume everything that is ours to save it.
3. If we are one of the five choices above, did Christ have to completely assume it (meaning if we are 2. c), He cannot just assume 2. a))?
4. Does this include sin? Why or why not? If so, how?

The Resurrection obviously, if there is any corruption, makes it incorrupt.
5. a) But doesn't the Divine Nature already do this? The Divine nature is by essence, incorruptible, and the Human nature is by essence, corruptible. What did this union of the Divine and Human Natures cause in Christ? Was He corruptible, incorruptible or both? (I'm thinking both)
b) Did the Divine Nature prevent corruption? If so, which of the five choices from 2? If it did, what did the Resurrection do then?
c) It seems that with the Resurrection, that all the natural laws that were bounding on Christ (even though He had the power to supernaturally break them) no longer applied to His Resurrected Body. He walked through walls, appeared and disappeared etc.
Is this a negation of corruption in sense 2. a)? Or in other words, was Adam like this before the fall?

Final Question:
6. Did Christ restore us by having a human nature without all the corruption that we have, or by having it, but having it united to the Divine Nature?

I know I have flooded the thread with questions, but I would really like to know and understand all these issues because they aren't making any sense, and they've been bothering me for some time. Please try to keep your answers organized, that way we will save a lot of confusion from happening.

GB

View user's profile Send private message

minasoliman

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 25, 2009 - 07:45 PM

Perhaps, this thread's discussion can help clear some thoughts:

http://www.coptichymns.net/PNphpBB2-vie ... -7871.html

God bless.

View user's profile Send private message

Truth.Seeker

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 25, 2009 - 09:32 PM

This is from a document by H.E. Metropolitan Bishoy (probably an English transcription of an Arabic lecture he gave):

<i>" First: The doctrine of The Original Sin is one of the important corners of Christian doctrine, because, if there were no original sin there would not have been death for the rest of humanity, and the descendents of Adam would not have had need for salvation. Therefore, non-Christians who reject the doctrine of redemption also reject the doctrine of the original sin and its inheritance.

The Bible says: “Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom 5:12). Now the question is: “Is original sin the inheritance of death only”? If this were the case, then God would be unjust (God forbid), because inheriting death would be inheriting the punishment without justification. But, sin entered the world through our forefathers’ sin, and it passed from them to all humanity who came from their seed. So, passing on death was caused by passing on sin. Otherwise, what does St. Paul mean in saying in his epistle to the Romans: “Through one man sin entered the world”? What is the intended world here, but the human race; and who is this one man but Adam.

The Bible also says: “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive” (1 Cor 15:22).

As we inherited the original sin from Adam through our birth from him (he being the origin of the human race), likewise we inherited from Christ His righteousness and inherited life, because we have been born of Him in baptism through the Holy Spirit; He is the origin of all believers who put on Christ –putting on the righteousness of Christ: “For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal 3:27).

Original sin is the sin of Adam, and original righteousness is the righteousness of Christ.

The first Adam led humanity into sin and death, and the second Adam led humanity into righteousness and life. Everyone born of Adam and Eve says, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me” (Ps 51:5).

Everyone born of Christ in baptism through the Holy Spirit says, “[We are] being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (Rom 3:24).

The term origin in the theological understanding means the source, so the term The Father means origin who is the source in the Holy Trinity, as the first church fathers explained.

If we say original sin we mean the sin from which sprang the sins of all humans, carrying with it the punishment of death, “For the wages of sin is death” (Rom 6:23).


From The Saying Of The Holy Fathers:

St. Athanasius the Apostolic wrote: “For as when Adam had transgressed, his sin reached unto all men, so, when the Lord had become man and had overthrown the Serpent, that so great strength of His is to extend through all men” .

He also wrote: “For no longer according to our former origin in Adam do we die; but henceforward our origin and all infirmity of flesh being transferred to the Word, we rise from the earth, the curse from sin being removed” .

In his book On the Incarnation of the Word he wrote: “He [Christ] next offered up His sacrifice also on behalf of all, yielding His Temple to death in the stead of all, in order firstly to make men quit and free of their old trespass”

Here we notice that St. Athanasius the Apostolic mentioned the old trespass (or original trespass) of humanity, contrary to what the monk Basil St. Macarius claimed in The Sunday School Magazine issue 8 of year 2002, that St. Augustine is the first to invent the phrase Original Sin, and that this understanding is a Catholic concept.

What confirms the annulment of the claim of the monk Basil St. Macarius is what was mentioned in the teachings of St. Cyril the Great, where he mentioned the phrase Original Sin of humanity: “For it is the time of holiness, when our old (original) sin () having departed to utter destruction, the soul of each is renewed to a habit of virtue unwavering.”

So, St. Athanasius the Apostolic is not alone, but St. Cyril the Pillar of Faith mentioned the Original Sin… and St. Ambrose and St. Augustine thereafter… so now what!


 Second: The Difference between Personal Responsibility and Inheriting Original Sin

It is understandable that each person has a personal responsibility in determining his fate; therefore the Lord arranged salvation for all humans who inherited the original sin, to whom death passed as a result of sin coming to them.

Though the descendents of Adam were not personally responsible for the Original Sin, they inherited the state of sin into which Adam and Eve fell. However, they have the opportunity, along with Adam, to choose the way of salvation and gain adoption to God, by accepting God’s gift in Christ.

An individual person’s responsibility is what determines his fate; therefore, there are people who chose the path of fellowship with Satan, and there are others who chose the path of fellowship with God.

The Old Testament saints slept in hope of salvation, and the Lord Christ went to them and preached to them the fulfillment of redemption, saved them from Hades, and transferred them to Paradise. This is what St. Peter the apostle clarified in his first epistle when he spoke of the Lord Christ, “being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison” (1Pe 3:18-19).

And the New Testament saints are the ones who accepted the faith in Christ’s death and resurrection, and accepted the new birth in baptism: “Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Rom 6:4).

St. Cyril the Great pointed to the question of personal responsibility in light of the verse that says, “The soul who sins shall die” (Ez 18:4), and why sin passed from Adam to all humans although they did not exist at the time of his fall, and did not personally will to share in his actions at that point in time. He said:

“Yes, ‘the soul that sinneth, the same shall die.’ But we have become sinners through the disobedience of Adam in this way. Adam, you see, had been made for incorruption and life. Moreover, the life he led in the paradise of delight was suited to saints; his mind was ever absorbed by the vision of God; his body was perfectly at peace, all base lust at rest; for unbecoming emotions did not disturb him. But when he fell subject to sin and sank down to corruption, from that time forth impure lusts invaded the nature of the flesh and the law of sin blossomed which rages in our members. Human nature has, therefore, contracted the malady of sin through the disobedience of one man, Adam. It is in this way that the many have been made sinners - not as though they had transgressed with Adam (for they did not yet exit), but because they are of his nature, the nature that fell beneath the law of sin….Human nature grew ill with corruption in Adam because of the act of disobedience, and so the passions entered in…”. [In Romanos, Rom 5:18-19 (Pusey, In Ioannem 3, 186-87)].”


 Third: His Holiness Pope Shenouda III (may the Lord preserve his life) said: “The judgment of death passed against Adam and Eve was passed against every cell in their bodies, which includes the cells from which we as humans came thereafter.” Therefore no one is exempt from this judgment of death. The matter was in need of renewing the nature, and salvation from the judgment of death –through the death of Christ instead of us, as our teacher St. Paul the apostle said, “If One died for all, then all died” (2 Cor 5:14)." </i>

___________

These are my thoughts for what they are worth:

As for the other questions, just keep in mind that if Christ had had sin (not only would it be blasphemy and impossible), but He would not have been able to save anybody, as He Himself would have needed someone to save Him from His sin. Does that thought put your mind at ease?

Remember also that everybody is going to resurrect in the body, whether good or bad. Note also that everybody dies in the body, whether good or bad. So, when we are saved from death through Christ, we are saved from eternal death, not physical death.

So, perhaps the best way to think about it is that Christ was subject to physical death, never subject to eternal death. He "inherited" the judgment against Adam's sin (death/physical death), but not the consequences of Adam's sin (inclination to sin).

Sorry this isn't as broken down as your questions, but it's hard to break the quotes down. Is there any part that is still unclear?

View user's profile Send private message

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 26, 2009 - 06:48 PM

I am deeply sorry for the misunderstanding which happened. I understood your definition of the corrupt nature as the corrupt nature of Adam and Eve, which, once again, resulted from the original sin.

Now that all the questions of the topic of original sin have been answered, can we return to the original topic? Before I put H.E. Metropolitan Bishoy's views (which will probably bring the discussion to a close), I would like to see what other views there can be...

Please pray for my weakness...


_________________
Grant me, O my Good Savior, that I might consider Your suffering my treasure, Your crown of thorns my glory, Your pain my happiness, Your bitterness my sweetness, Your blood my life, Your love my pride and thanksgiving. O wounds of Christ, wound me with the spear of Divine love.

He must increase, and I must decrease.

View user's profile Send private message

minasoliman

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 27, 2009 - 03:47 AM

No need to apologize. Your Father of Confession is understandably protective for the understanding of the faith, and that is admirable.

God bless you.

View user's profile Send private message

mikokiko

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 27, 2009 - 04:25 AM

Truth.Seeker, thanks a lot for the reply, it did help, not completely though, especially the St. Cyril quote, which clarified a lot of my questions (but not all of them). I think there is one main good reason why people have been really cynical of the term Original Sin. The term in and of itself has nothing wrong with it, but its the way its been used by the West for a long time that has left people like myself in the Orthodox Church to be at least a little bit cynical of its use. This is because for some time it was used to mean that we ourselves bear the guilt of Adam's disobedience in Paradise, when we ourselves never chose his sin.

It directly conflicts with God's Justice. Why are we suffering the consequences of what we have not chosen? What's the point of free will then? This is one thing that H.E. Metropolitan Bishoy does not make clear in his article, unless he is the one quoting St. Cyril (I'm not really sure). This is why I prefer, and the Church (as in all the liturgical services) prefers to use the term 'corruption'. The Original Sin of Adam brought on corruption to the human race. Now, the question is, does this corruption make humans by essence SINFUL (that is, bound to commit sins) during their life time, or does it simply make them inclined to sin? So that our desires have been corrupted all together, to make it harder for us to attain righteousness. This would make sense to me. But to say that we became guilty by default becomes of Adam's disobedience, takes away from the Justice in God's declaration to Ezekiel saying, "He shall not die for the iniquity of his father; He shall surely live!" (Ezekiel 18:17) And again, God upholds personal responsibility when He says: "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin." (Deuteronomy 24:16)

So Adam's sin, could not be the reason for our death. Only the corruption he wrought on to the human nature could have caused our death. But this still doesn't answer my question on what we mean by corruption: are we SINFUL because of Adam, or are our inclinations and desires corrupted? This is what no one has made clear to me yet. If we are sinful because of someone else, then it is ultimately not my choice to be sinful or not. If it is my free will that decides then we cannot be sinful by default. I can understand that our inclinations became corrupted or entire environment (my body with its corrupted desires and inclinations), setting up great obstacles between us and God, a big rift between heaven and Earth, but I can't understand Adam making us sinful.

So what is it? Are we just sinful by default because of Adam's disobedience, or are we just INCLINED to sin? Secondly, if we are more inclined to sin, does that mean that someone can still be perfect (and therefore not in need of salvation), since none of us are sinful by necessity?

If you closely observe the idea of corruption and the fall and the original sin you will confront countless problems.

God Bless

View user's profile Send private message

Christ4Life

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 27, 2009 - 05:06 AM

One important aspect you are overlooking is God's grace. If indeed we are sinful (which I believe is the case, but nobody quote me on this), we have been given the grace of God to overcome such a sinful nature. If we were not of a sinful nature, why then would we baptize all children, and make great efforts into baptizing children which (God forbid) may be near death? However, we are given the grace of God and the Holy Spirit, through which we overcome such a sinful and corrupted nature.

Thank you for understanding Mina.

View user's profile Send private message

mikokiko

Back to top Reply with quote

posted on Mar 27, 2009 - 07:08 AM

I'm not sure where I overlooked God's grace in that post, and I do realize we have had our human nature corrupted. But the question is are we bound to sin because of Adam? Or are we simply inclined to sin because of Adam? If we are inclined to sin, but are not bound by necessity to sin, then salvation is not necessarily universal. If we are bound to sin, then why will some of us go to Hell when we have not chosen by our free will to be sinful (but were born that way because of Adam)?

Anyways, I think I am starting to understand the situation after much thought, but I will give others a chance to address my thoughts.

GB

View user's profile Send private message
 
 
 

Return to the Forum Index

Powered by the coptichymns.net Network of Coptic Hymns and Coptic Orthodox Sites.

TotalDaily
Topics:77672.49
Users:61951.99
Posts:6463120.74
 

520 unlogged users and No registered users online now.

 

Already a member? Log in above.

Not a member? Register your unique identity to participate more fully in our site!