Do Mormons Believe in the Original Sin?

[cthulhubryan]

Then English still remains your problem. By “taint” I don’t understand “guilt”. If that is what you understand by it, then sure I disagree with it. And I didn’t deny it either. I didn’t lie about anything. I made that perfectly clear in my Blog.

So you believe that little babies are guilty because of the “taint” of Adam, as you like to put it, and they will go to hell without baptism, right? Well, at least you are honest enough to admit it, unlike most other Catholics I know.

Of course not! We do no such thing.

Yes, we do deny that. Immaculate Conception is unbiblical and a false doctrine.

zerinus

Babies are guilty just as we are. Babies therefore are worthy of hell due to original sin but we trust in the goodness of God that since they never reached the age to commit a mortal sin in their own right that they will not go to hell.

If you deny that man is guilty of original sin, then you deny Gods grace in forgiving it.

Denying the truth of original sin makes denying Immaculate Conception somewhat logical so at least you are being logically consistent in your errors.

 

[zerinus]

Tell me if I have the LDS postion wrong.

God wanted people to sin because he knew that once they knew good and evil, they would have true free will.

God wanted people to sin because once they could suffer and struggle, they could grow.

God wanted people to sin knowing that some of them would prefer sin to God, sending them to hell.

You have got the LDS position very wrong. God never wanted people to sin.

zerinus

 

[ParkerD]

I am not telling God anything. I am telling you. I have not re-written anything at all, either.

How can it mean anything else? YOU HAVE INFERRED THE MEANING.

You have no idea how much of the Bible I have read. Nor do you understand why the Traditions of the Catholic CHurch should be held on to. I could say the same to you.

And if they do not accept him, how will their knee bend?

Ralph,
You might as well re-read Genesis 1-3, then re-read your posts about what God intended and said and did. I’m glad you read the Bible.

Your last question is correct. They will accept him–that’s why they will bend their knee.

If you wish to hold onto your traditions, that’s fine with me. But Aquinas gave you “another gospel”, not the fulness of the gospel of redemption through Jesus Christ.

 

[ParkerD]

Jerusha,
I give up. Have a nice day.

 

[zerinus]

Babies are guilty just as we are. Babies therefore are worthy of hell due to original sin but we trust in the goodness of God that since they never reached the age to commit a mortal sin in their own right that they will not go to hell.

That is bizarre and self-contradictory.

If you deny that man is guilty of original sin, then you deny Gods grace in forgiving it.

Another contradictory statement. If by God’s grace man has been forgiven of the Original Sin, then he is no longer guilty of it, is he.

Denying the truth of original sin makes denying Immaculate Conception somewhat logical so at least you are being logically consistent in your errors.

I am logically consistent in the truth.

zerinus

 

[Jerusha]

Jerusha,
I give up. Have a nice day.

Thank you. You have no idea how much I appreciate that. And you have a nice day, too.

 

[ralphinal]

You have got the LDS position very wrong. God never wanted people to sin.

zerinus

That seems to disagree with what Parker posted. Can you point me the right way?

 

[ralphinal]

Ralph,
You might as well re-read Genesis 1-3, then re-read your posts about what God intended and said and did. I’m glad you read the Bible.

Your last question is correct. They will accept him–that’s why they will bend their knee.

If you wish to hold onto your traditions, that’s fine with me. But Aquinas gave you “another gospel”, not the fulness of the gospel of redemption through Jesus Christ.

Wait, so those in hell will accept him? Or are the LDS saying that no one will be in hell?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Well, I guess we know the answer to the question.
No, Mormons do not believe in Original Sin.

 

[ParkerD]

Wait, so those in hell will accept him? Or are the LDS saying that no one will be in hell?

Ralph,
Re-read Rev. 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

That is the category of people who will “have their part in … the second death.” What happens in that place?
To find out:

Re-read 1 Peter 3:19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;

Re-read 1 Peter 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.

Re-read Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;

Re-read Romans 14:9 For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living.
10 But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

Christ “preached unto the spirits in prison.” He was anointed to “proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;” He is the “Lord both of the dead and the living.”

His work encompasses both this world and the spirit world. Repentance goes on there, and “bowing the knee” goes on there, just as repentance and “bowing the knee” goes on here. The Bible is clear on this matter.

Finally, re-read Rev. 1:17 And he laid his right hand upon me, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last:
18 I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.

Christ has the keys of hell and of death. He will use them to unlock even that place of torment as those suffering for their sins repent and forsake their sins. They will suffer for a long time (it will seem like forever), but the Redeemer is merciful enough to redeem even them.

 

[zerinus]

That seems to disagree with what Parker posted.

I don’t have the time to read every post. I don’t know what Parker posted.

Can you point me the right way?

Right way abut what?

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

I don’t have the time to read every post. I don’t know what Parker posted.

Right way abut what?

zerinus

Official LDS teaching on original sin

 

[zerinus]

Official LDS teaching on original sin

I explained that in my OP and Blog article to which I had linked.

We accept that aspect of the Original Sin that says man has inherited from the Fall of Adam a tendency to commit sin; but we reject that aspect of it that says a man is guilty because of the Original sin, even though he himself has not done anything wrong.

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

I explained that in my OP and Blog article to which I had linked.

We accept that aspect of the Original Sin that says man has inherited from the Fall of Adam a tendency to commit sin; but we reject that aspect of it that says a man is guilty because of the Original sin, even though he himself has not done anything wrong.

zerinus

Ok. I was asking for the wrong thing. Is there any place where we can see this idea of why the tree was there in the first place?

 

[zerinus]

Ok. I was asking for the wrong thing. Is there any place where we can see this idea of why the tree was there in the first place?

Indirectly yes. The tree was there in order to give them the knowledge of good and evil. God placed man on earth in order to be tested, and prove himself worthy of the greater glories that He had in store for him, as shown in these verses:

Abraham 3:

24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;
25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;
26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads forever and ever.

But in order for man to be tested, he had to obtain a knowledge of good and evil. If he didn’t know the difference between good and evil, how could he be tested to see if he would choose good and avoid evil? The purpose of the tree, however, was not just to give them a theoretical knowledge of good and evil. It put them in a situation where they would have to choose between good and evil—and suffer the consequences; which necessitated that they would have to be tempted with good and evil. Now God knew that if He put man in that situation, that most (if not all) men, because of the weakness of human nature, would at some point yield to temptation and do evil, which means that they would be damned and could not be saved. So a plan was devised from before the foundation of the world that would rescue a man who fell into temptation and sinned on the condition of faith in God and repentance of his sins. That plan was the Atonement of Jesus Christ. But there was more to that plan. Another thing that was required for that plan to be made operational was death. Man was originally created immortal. There was no death. Now if a man sinned in that state, and remained in that state, then he could not be saved, he would be damned eternally, because his state was an eternal one. Death was necessary in order to provide man with a state of probation in which he could repent. Therefore the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was placed in the garden so that man could partake of it if he wanted to; but the penalty for doing it was death. Death was necessary in order that man could afterwards repent, and be saved in the resurrection through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Therefore that is the plan of salvation that was put in place before the creation of the world. The tree was put in the Garden of Eden and the penalty of death was affixed to partaking of it; and man was given the opportunity to partake of it and suffer the consequences if he chose to; but a plan was put in place to rescue him from it should he do so. The punishment of death for eating of the fruit was not exactly a “punishment” as such; but a necessary requirement to bring the eventual salvation of man. Without it mankind could not have repented after sinning, thus making the plan of salvation through the Atonement not possible. Death was necessary as a byproduct of partaking of the fruit so that mortality would become a state of probation during which mankind could repent, thus making the plan of salvation possible. There are passages in LDS scriptures to back all of that up, but it would have taken a bit of time to quote them all. I will do that later on if you want me to.

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

Indirectly yes. The tree was there in order to give them the knowledge of good and evil. God placed man on earth in order to be tested, and prove himself worthy of the greater glories that He had in store for him, as shown in these verses:

Abraham 3:

24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell;
25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them;
26 And they who keep their first estate shall be added upon; and they who keep not their first estate shall not have glory in the same kingdom with those who keep their first estate; and they who keep their second estate shall have glory added upon their heads forever and ever.

But in order for man to be tested, he had to obtain a knowledge of good and evil. If he didn’t know the difference between good and evil, how could he be tested to see if he would choose good and avoid evil? The purpose of the tree, however, was not just to give them a theoretical knowledge of good and evil. It put them in a situation where they would have to choose between good and evil—and suffer the consequences; which necessitated that they would have to be tempted with good and evil. Now God knew that if He put man in that situation, that most (if not all) men, because of the weakness of human nature, would at some point yield to temptation and do evil, which means that they would be damned and could not be saved. So a plan was devised from before the foundation of the world that would rescue a man who fell into temptation and sinned on the condition of faith in God and repentance of his sins. That plan was the Atonement of Jesus Christ. But there was more to that plan. Another thing that was required for that plan to be made operational was death. Man was originally created immortal. There was no death. Now if a man sinned in that state, and remained in that state, then he could not be saved, he would be damned eternally, because his state was an eternal one. Death was necessary in order to provide man with a state of probation in which he could repent. Therefore the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was placed in the garden so that man could partake of it if he wanted to; but the penalty for doing it was death. Death was necessary in order that man could afterwards repent, and be saved in the resurrection through the Atonement of Jesus Christ. Therefore that is the plan of salvation that was put in place before the creation of the world. The tree was put in the Garden of Eden and the penalty of death was affixed to partaking of it; and man was given the opportunity to partake of it and suffer the consequences if he chose to; but a plan was put in place to rescue him from it should he do so. The punishment of death for eating of the fruit was not exactly a “punishment” as such; but a necessary requirement to bring the eventual salvation of man. Without it mankind could not have repented after sinning, thus making the plan of salvation through the Atonement not possible. Death was necessary as a byproduct of partaking of the fruit so that mortality would become a state of probation during which mankind could repent, thus making the plan of salvation possible. There are passages in LDS scriptures to back all of that up, but it would have taken a bit of time to quote them all. I will do that later on if you want me to.

zerinus

No need to pull verses at this time. I do have a couple of questions. First, had man not known good and evil, how could he sin in the immortal state? Second, are you saying that eating of the fruit was not a sin because they did not know that disobeying God was a sin?

 

[zerinus]

No need to pull verses at this time. I do have a couple of questions. First, had man not known good and evil, how could he sin in the immortal state?

What I meant was, if the penalty of death had not been affixed to partaking of the forbidden fruit, repentance would not have been possible after it, because man was in an immortal and eternal state, and his sin would have also eternally remained with him. Death was necessary in order to create as state of probation during with man could repent, and be saved through the plan of salvation that was laid, which was effected through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

Second, are you saying that eating of the fruit was not a sin because they did not know that disobeying God was a sin?

It was a sin because God had commanded them not to do it; but you need to understand exactly why God had commanded them not to do it. God did not tell them that it was something inherently wrong. He told them the reason why they should not partake of it was that if they did, they would “surely die”:

Genesis 2:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Partaking of the fruit was not something immoral. Only the penalty of death had been affixed to it for the reason I had explained. It is like me telling you not to drink from that bottle of poison because if you do you will die! Eating the poison is not immoral. It just is not a sensible thing to do if you are planning on staying alive! The only thing that made it a sin was the commandment of God to them no to do it; but the reason why God had told them not to do it was the immediate consequences of it which was death, not because it was something inherently wrong. Eventually they realized that the sensible course of action was to partake of the fruit and suffer the unpleasant consequences—which would be temporary.

zerinus

 

[ralphinal]

What I meant was, if the penalty of death had not been affixed to partaking of the forbidden fruit, repentance would not have been possible after it, because man was in an immortal and eternal state, and his sin would have also eternally remained with him. Death was necessary in order to create as state of probation during with man could repent, and be saved through the plan of salvation that was laid, which was effected through the Atonement of Jesus Christ.

I see that. But in order for him to repent, he would need to sin. How could he sin if he did not know good and evil? Would that not make Adam and Eve like Children before the age of reason?

It was a sin because God had commanded them not to do it; but you need to understand exactly why God had commanded them not to do it. God did not tell them that it was something inherently wrong. He told them the reason why they should not partake of it was that if they did, they would “surely die”:

Genesis 2:

17 But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Partaking of the fruit was not something immoral. Only the penalty of death had been affixed to it for the reason I had explained. It is like me telling you not to drink from that bottle of poison because if you do you will die! Eating the poison is not immoral. It just is not a sensible thing to do if you are planning on staying alive! The only thing that made it a sin was the commandment of God to them no to do it; but the reason why God had told them not to do it was the immediate consequences of it which was death, not because it was something inherently wrong. Eventually they realized that the sensible course of action was to partake of the fruit and suffer the unpleasant consequences—which would be temporary.

zerinus

Then why did they get kicked out of the Garden?

 

[zerinus]

I see that. But in order for him to repent, he would need to sin. How could he sin if he did not know good and evil? Would that not make Adam and Eve like Children before the age of reason?

Although Adam and Eve had not yet partaken of the forbidden tree, and strictly speaking had not yet acquired the knowledge of good and evil, scriptures identify his disobedience as a sin, or a transgression. I suppose there must be a first to everything.

Then why did they get kicked out of the Garden?

That was part of the process of learning good and evil. As I explained, partaking of the fruit did not just give them a theoretical knowledge of good and evil; it put them is a situation where they would have to learn by their own experience the difference between good and evil. Life in the Garden was too cushy. Everything was provided for them. They didn’t have to work hard for anything. That was part of their experience of learning good and evil, having to eat their bread by the sweat of their brow, rather than having it provided for them on a plate.

zerinus

 

[cthulhubryan]

That is bizarre and self-contradictory.

Another contradictory statement. If by God’s grace man has been forgiven of the Original Sin, then he is no longer guilty of it, is he.

I am logically consistent in the truth.

zerinus

Since you are in error, you can not be consistent with the truth.

God will forgive man of Original Sin and all his sins if man asks, but without that man is still guilty. The false teachings of the LDS church indicate that it is possible for a man to be sinless, which is false.