How can anybody possibly believe that "all have sinned"?

[Orionthehunter]

But the question is not about original sin. “All have sinned” is not the same as “all are stained by sin” or “all inherit a fallen nature because of sin”. No, “all have sinned” is a statement that all have committed acts of sin. And I ask, what acts of sin has a stillborn baby committed?

I don’t want to confuse the issue but it appears that it might be possible for even the newly concieved unborn (or at some stage where they have brain waves I suppose) are given opportunity to respond positively or adversely to God. Whether Divine Justice and Divine Mercy would characterize any such response as worthy of damnation or salvation is outside what I believe God has revealed to us although the teaching on accountability (knowledge and consent) probably covers it.

Gal 1:15 “But when (God), who from my mother’s womb had set me apart and called me through his grace.” (We are called at conception to be children of God)

Psalm 22: “Yet you drew me forth from the womb, made me safe at my mother’s breast. Upon you I was thrust from the womb; since birth you are my God.” (Sure looks like belief is possible for infants)

Psalm 58: “The wicked have been corrupt since birth; liars from the womb, they have gone astray.” (If you can be a non-believer in the womb, why can’t you be a believer?)

Psalm 71 “On you I depend since birth; from my mother’s womb you are my strength; my hope in you never wavers.” (If we depend on God since birth and not some later date, why should we deny them the graces of Baptism until later?)

Psalm 139: "You formed my inmost being; you knit me in my mother’s womb. "

Sirach 1:12 “The beginning of wisdom is fear of the LORD, which is formed with the faithful in the womb.” (I guess we can be a believer in the womb)

Sirach 46: 13 “Beloved of his people, dear to his Maker, dedicated from his mother’s womb, Consecrated to the LORD as a prophet, was SAMUEL, the judge and priest. At God’s word he established the kingdom and anointed princes to rule the people.” (This certainly looks like it happened as an infant!)

Sirach 49: 6-7 “Who burned the holy city and left its streets desolate, As JEREMIAH had foretold; for they had treated him badly who even in the womb had been made a prophet, To root out, pull down, and destroy, and then to build and to plant.” (Another example of acts of faith happening in the womb. Jeremiah had to have responded to the call voluntarily in the womb to accept this vocation).

Sirach 50:22 "And now, bless the God of all, who has done wondrous things on earth; Who fosters men’s growth from their mother’s womb, and fashions them according to his will! "

Isaiah 49:1 "Hear me, O coastlands, listen, O distant peoples. The LORD called me from birth, from my mother’s womb he gave me my name. "

Hosea 12:3-4 "The LORD has a grievance against Israel: he shall punish Jacob for his conduct, for his deeds he shall repay him. In the womb he supplanted his brother, and as a man he contended with God;

 

[Mannyfit75]

As I said before even infants can desire things contrary to what is good. that *dosn’t mean they know it is sin. *It dosn’t make them accountable for it, but it’s still contrary to the eternal law.

Origional sin sets us towards sin naturally. Babies do not need someone to teach them to be selfish or greedy. We have to teach them NOT to. So many of them have their first words to be a defiant “NO!” or a strong “MINE!”

Babies are not taught evil. They are taught to do the right thing by their parents. They are taught to know what is evil and what is good.

Toddlers are know to say those things. They aren’t toddlers forever. They eventually grow and will know what is right and what is wrong.

A parent teaches his son or daughter not to steal things from other. To do so would be wrong. A child understand this. So he does not steal. But sometimes, his selfish may tempt him to sin. He may see the kid next door has a cool toy, that he wants. His parent could not afford it. So the boy steals it.

An infant has no concept of right and wrong. They are taught by the parents. As parents, it is their moral duty in the development of their children spiritual growth. This will either bear fruit, or rotten fruit.

 

[eliasaph99]

This is extremely pedantic. I can harldy believe its being discussed at such length.

“All have sinned” does not mean “all have sinned” in the strictest possible literal interpretion because then Christ would have sinned. He was a man, and would therefore fall under the umbrella of “all”.

Before any objections are raised stating, “but it says all so it has to mean all”, remember that the author (St. Paul) clearly knew that Christ had not sinned. Ergo, it should not be read in this extremely strict and pedantic manner.

It is simply a qualifer intending to throw a wide net. Like if I were to say, “Everyone knows that the moon isn’t made of green cheese.” Do I really mean everyone? No. Obviously infants don’t know. Unborn babies don’t know. Very young children don’t know. So let’s not read the absurd into a simple statement. All have sinned means that mankind has sinned, in the widest reasonable sense.

As for the whether infants who die are in heaven, I personally believe that there is a clue from the scriptures. Consider the story of David and his sin with Bathsheba. To read the entire story, read 2 Samuel 11:1 to 2 Samuel 12:25. The infant conceived in David’s sin is taken by God to punish David. David’s fasts and weeps while the child is yet alive, but after the child dies, he rises and cleans himself. When asked why, he says this “While the child was living, I fasted and wept thinking, ‘Perhaps the LORD will grant me the child’s life.’ But now he is dead. Why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will not return to me.” - 2 Samuel 12:22-23

I have no doubt in my heart that King David is with God in Heaven, and he said that he would go to his child. Therefore his child is there also. But why? His child was stained with original sin and did not ever have opportunity to show faithfulness to God. It can only be that God does not take account of Original Sin in those who have had no opportunity or ability to change their status. They have no share of guilt in their situation, the guilt is Adams. Therefore, they go to heaven, through the Just Mercy of God.

 

[Syele]

An infant has no concept of right and wrong. They are taught by the parents. As parents, it is their moral duty in the development of their children spiritual growth. This will either bear fruit, or rotten fruit.

Are you trying to say that an infant is a blank slate with no tendancy towards good or evil? People DO have natures that are inborn into them. Often Children have mannerisms that they inherited from their parent they never meet. Twins seperated at Bitrh often have uncanny similarities in their lives… even with different environments and different people raising them. Yes as parents, we DO have a responsibility to teach our children right from wrong, BUT They are not blank slates affected only by the adults around them.

 

[AlegreFe]

Well last I checked, Catholics also believe in origional sin.

Of course there is original sin. Adam & Eve brought that about. And I know that you’re going to say, “but Jesus did away with it.” But that doesn’t mean that the sin of Adam & Eve never happened. It’s still there and so is the concupiscence/effects of sin.

(Romans 3:9-10) - "What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; 10as it is written, “There is none righteous, not even one.”

(Romans 3:23) - “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”

(Psalm 14:3) - “They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.”

(Ephesians 2:3) - All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath.

There are other scriptures as well that say everyone has sinned. Only Jesus (who was Fully God) did not sin.

This is the whole point of the OP. These passages do not mean that ALL have sinned.

The word “all” is used many times in scripture but it doesn’t mean ALL in a literal sense the way you think it does.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Are you trying to say that an infant is a blank slate with no tendancy towards good or evil?

At a very young age, they lack the means to reason and use their conscious to do good and evil. Their minds are very young and they are developing.

As they grow more mature and reach the age of reason (believed to be age 8), they can commit sin. By this time, they have develop a maturity level of understanding the world around them. It is a process.

I want to make it clear to you at the beginning of infancy, babies cannot commit sin. They lack the maturity level of understanding what is good in their consciousness. It develops over time.

 

[Syele]

Of course there is original sin. Adam & Eve brought that about. And I know that you’re going to say, “but Jesus did away with it.” But that doesn’t mean that the sin of Adam & Eve never happened. It’s still there and so is the concupiscence/effects of sin.
.

No I’m not saying Jesus Did away with it. Someone said Adam and Eve didn’t know good and evil and that if you don’t know it’s sin then it isn’t sin. By that logic Adam and Eve DIDN’T sin cause they didn’t know better?!?

I’m saying it IS sin even if you don’t know it’s a sin. Newborn babies wouldn’t know selfishness is sin, but they aren’t considered accountable for it due to being too young to understand.

 

[AlegreFe]

Animals do not have souls.

Animals have souls as they could not be alive if they didn’t. But they don’t have the intellect and free will that humans have.

Animals do not have free-will. Babies are Humans and endowed with a will, with a soul. Babies do not understand what they do, yet they still have free-will. This is a dangerous thing. My 8 month old could walk and she was very curious. Was she still in danger even though she did not know it? YES! Knowledge is not the same as our soul.

Babies cannot commit personal sin. If a baby is not baptized, however, he/she will still have original sin on their soul as they were not born into God. Baptism brings babies and adults into the Church making them children of God. The baptized are adopted children of God, otherwise they are still of Adam & Eve/original sin.

 

[AlegreFe]

I think the OP was talking about Actual Sin, not Original Sin.

Absolutely!

 

[Syele]

At a very young age, they lack the means to reason and use their conscious to do good and evil. Their minds are very young and they are developing.

As they grow more mature and reach the age of reason (believed to be age 8), they can commit sin. By this time, they have develop a maturity level of understanding the world around them. It is a process.

I want to make it clear to you at the beginning of infancy, babies cannot commit sin. They lack the maturity level of understanding what is good in their consciousness. It develops over time.

then what we are arguing is the definition of sin. Due to the undevelped nature of a babys brain, they are NOT held accountable for their actions…(we agree on this) however the scriptures say “All unrighteousness is sin” (1 john 5:17).

 

[AlegreFe]

Look it up in the Catechism, I don’t agree with it, stillborn babies going to hell etc. But thats what the Catholics believe.

Lee44

You think that we believe that unbaptized babies go to hell??!! We don’t think that. Who told you that? It’s not true.

We put unbaptized babies in the Mercy of God. Praying the Divine Mercy Chaplet is good for those babies. We can only hope that with God’s Mercy those babies will see God. We would never say that they go to hell. No where in the CCC does it say that we condemn them to hell.

 

[Syele]

We gain knowledge from others. Babies are new in this world, and they have much to learn.

Yes Babies have much to learn, but we cannot define right and wrong based on what babies know. it is not so grey, right is right and wrong is wrong. God’s nature does not change because we do or don’t know something. His nature stays the same. Sin is still sin. Luckily God’s nature also includes mercy and He is not unjust to those who do not know better.

 

[AlegreFe]

…however the scriptures say “All unrighteousness is sin” (1 john 5:17).

Don’t take that literally. There are many scripture verses in the bible that use “all” but it doesn’t mean literally all.

Why do you insist on taking that any some other verses on a literal basis and not take John 6 on a literal basis? That puzzles me and it makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Syele]

Don’t take that literally. There are many scripture verses in the bible that use “all” but it doesn’t mean literally all.

Why do you insist on taking that any some other verses on a literal basis and not take John 6 on a literal basis? That puzzles me and it makes no sense whatsoever.

What puzzles me is, John 6 appears to be the only literal passage in the whole Bible.

 

[AlegreFe]

Is there anyone who believes that there is a person capable of sinning who has not sinned? (Other than Christ and, for our Catholic brethern, Mary?)

If you’re talking about a child who has not sinned yet, then yes, but it wouldn’t be until the age of reason.

If you’re talking about a mentally handicapped person, no, he/she would never be capable of committing personal sin.
With that siad, the “all” in scripture is not to be taken literally.

 

[AlegreFe]

What puzzles me is, John 6 appears to be the only literal passage in the whole Bible.

There is no way that any Catholic would say that John 6 is the only literal passage in the bible. It just happens to be the one that a lot of Protestants would not take as literal.

 

[AlegreFe]

But the question is not about original sin. “All have sinned” is not the same as “all are stained by sin” or “all inherit a fallen nature because of sin”. No, “all have sinned” is a statement that all have committed acts of sin.

(emphasis added)

I hope you’re not taking that literally? I somehow think you don’t though and perhaps is the whole point of this thread.

VociMike:

And I ask, what acts of sin has a stillborn baby committed?

None.

 

[Lee44]

. Who told you that? It’s not true.

A Catholic Priest after he had about 7 Jack’s and Coke.

 

[Syele]

There is no way that any Catholic would say that John 6 is the only literal passage in the bible. It just happens to be the one that a lot of Protestants would not take as literal.

I’m sorry, that was a bit harsh, but you’d be amazed how many things in the Bible Catholics have informed me are not literal, the entire book of Genesis to start and so many others that I am beginning to think reguardless of what passage I believe some Catholic somewhere will tell me not to take it literal. I assume this isn’t literal either?

Romans 3

10As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11there is no one who understands,
no one who seeks God.
12All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”

 

[AlegreFe]

How do you know it wasn’t the understanding intended by God. I don’t think those verses were written with stillborn babies as the audience.

Psalm 51:5
5Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

Romans 5:12
12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

The way an infant sins is that they were born that way. The verses are literal and they include Origional sin.

So you do believe in original sin! Those verses point to original sin. But that doesn’t mean that those other verses are to be taken literally because those other verses are speaking of actual personal sin and NOT original sin at all.