ECT Augustine and His Many Blunders

[Jerry Shugart]

In his book on Adam's fall I. A. McFarland wrote that Augustine marked a "transition from a loosely conceived, broadly ecumenial doctrine of the fall to a much more tightly formulated doctine of original sin...Augustine's thought decisively redirected Christian interpretation of the fall" (I.A. McFarland, In Adam's Fall: A Meditation on the Christian doctrine of Original Sin, 32).

We will see that Augustine's theory of Original Sin was based on a basic misunderstanding of the following verses which speak of the results of Adam's eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil:

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life" (Gen.3:22-24).​

First, we can understand that Adam was created in a mortal body because in order for him to live for ever it was necessary for him to eat of the Tree of Life. That idea is supported by by the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges:

"Man must be prevented from eating of the Tree of Life, and so obtaining another prerogative of Divinity, that of immortality. Man is created mortal."

Henry Alford wrote that "man was created subject to death" (Henry Alford, The Book of Genesis and Part of the Book of Exodus; A Revised Edition [London: John Childs and Son, 1872], 19).

Gerald Bray said that "Adam was not created as an immortal being, but in the garden of Eden he was protected against death. When he fell the protection was removed and he suffered the consequences as his nature was allowed to take its course " [emphasis added] (Gerald Bray, "Sin in Historical Theology," in Fallen: A Theology of Sin, 169).

We also know that when Adam ate of that tree his physical body did not undergo a change in his physical makeup. Albert Barnes wrote the following:

"The tree of the knowledge of good and evil effected a change, not in the physical constitution of man, but in his mental experience - in his knowledge of good and evil" (Albert Barnes, Barnes Notes on the Bible, Commentary at Gen.3:22).​

There is absolutely no evidence that the physical body of Adam was changed in any way at all. He died physically because he was denied the very thing which would have allowed him to live for ever--the Tree of Life. Despite this Augustine mistakenly believed that when Adam sinned he "despoiled his body":

G.F. Wiggers quoted Augustine saying the following: "If Adam had not sinned, he would not have been despoiled of his body, but would have been clothed with immortality and incorruptibility, that what is mortal should be swallowed up of life..." De Pec. Mer. I. 2, 4." [emphasis added] (G.F. Wiggers, An Historical Presentation of Augustinism and Pelagianism From the Original Sources [Andover, MA: Gould, Newman & Saxton, 1840], 92; A Reproduction by Forgotten Books).

John Calvin followed Augustine in thinking that Adam's body and his descendant's bodies are defiled as a result of concupisence, writing that "everything which is in man, from the intellect to the will, from the soul even to the flesh, is defiled and pervaded with this concupiscence; or, to express it more briefly, that the whole man is in himself nothing else than concupiscence" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion; 2:1:8).

So we can see that the foundation of the theory of Original Sin was built on a false idea about what happened when Adam sinned. But many people still cling to the teaching found in this theory, a theory which was first formulated during the dark ages!

 

[nikolai_42]

First, we can understand that Adam was created in a mortal body because in order for him to live for ever it was necessary for him to eat of the Tree of Life. That idea is supported by by the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges:

"Man must be prevented from eating of the Tree of Life, and so obtaining another prerogative of Divinity, that of immortality. Man is created mortal."

Henry Alford wrote that "man was created subject to death" (Henry Alford, The Book of Genesis and Part of the Book of Exodus; A Revised Edition [London: John Childs and Son, 1872], 19).

Gerald Bray said that "Adam was not created as an immortal being, but in the garden of Eden he was protected against death. When he fell the protection was removed and he suffered the consequences as his nature was allowed to take its course " [emphasis added] (Gerald Bray, "Sin in Historical Theology," in Fallen: A Theology of Sin, 169).

We also know that when Adam ate of that tree his physical body did not undergo a change in his physical makeup. Albert Barnes wrote the following:

"The tree of the knowledge of good and evil effected a change, not in the physical constitution of man, but in his mental experience - in his knowledge of good and evil" (Albert Barnes, Barnes Notes on the Bible, Commentary at Gen.3:22).​

There is absolutely no evidence that the physical body of Adam was changed in any way at all. He died physically because he was denied the very thing which would have allowed him to live for ever--the Tree of Life. Despite this Augustine mistakenly believed that when Adam sinned he "despoiled his body":

So man - before the fall - would not have died (was protected from death), but man - after eating of the fruit - now was subject to death. If he wasn't dying before eating of the fruit, then the physical processes must have been regenerative. If he died (or started dying) after eating the fruit, then by necessity the physical processes were corruption and decay set in. If corruption was allowed to set in because he was denied access to the Tree of Life, then can we conclude that he didn't eat of it to begin with (or would have already been immortal without recourse)? The problem there is that he would have already forestalled the effect of the curse in advance by eating what counteracted it. If we instead say he had to eat of it over and over again to maintain that protection from death, then he really wasn't protected from death except at his own eating. And God never told him he had to eat of the Tree of Life to maintain life. Further, death entered because of a positive act - eating of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Not a negative one (i.e. NOT eating of the Tree of Life). So the last option is that he never ate of it to begin with. There again, it can't hold that "He died physically because he was denied the very thing which would have allowed him to live for ever".

Bottom line - how can it be said that his sin DIDN'T affect Adam physically if he went from not dying to dying?

G.F. Wiggers quoted Augustine saying the following: "If Adam had not sinned, he would not have been despoiled of his body, but would have been clothed with immortality and incorruptibility, that what is mortal should be swallowed up of life..." De Pec. Mer. I. 2, 4." [emphasis added] (G.F. Wiggers, An Historical Presentation of Augustinism and Pelagianism From the Original Sources [Andover, MA: Gould, Newman & Saxton, 1840], 92; A Reproduction by Forgotten Books).

John Calvin followed Augustine in thinking that Adam's body and his descendant's bodies are defiled as a result of concupisence, writing that "everything which is in man, from the intellect to the will, from the soul even to the flesh, is defiled and pervaded with this concupiscence; or, to express it more briefly, that the whole man is in himself nothing else than concupiscence" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion; 2:1:8).

So we can see that the foundation of the theory of Original Sin was built on a false idea about what happened when Adam sinned. But many people still cling to the teaching found in this theory, a theory which was first formulated during the dark ages!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Bottom line - how can it be said that his sin DIDN'T affect Adam physically if he went from not dying to dying?

I never said that Adam's sin did not affect him but instead I said that it did not change his flesh and blood body, as Augustine imagined.

Adam was always in a mortal body and that is why he had to eat of the Tree of Life in order to live forever. And when he no longer had access to that tree then he died physically.

There is not even a hint that Adam's body was changed in any way when he ate of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

 

[nikolai_42]

I never said that Adam's sin did not affect him but instead I said that it did not change his flesh and blood body, as Augustine imagined.

Adam was always in a mortal body and that is why he had to eat of the Tree of Life in order to live forever. And when he no longer had access to that tree then he died physically.

There is not even a hint that Adam's body was changed in any way when he ate of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

Maybe you can clarify, then. Are you saying it did not change his flesh and blood body but it did affect him physically?

 

[tdhiggins]

In his book on Adam's fall I. A. McFarland wrote that Augustine marked a "transition from a loosely conceived, broadly ecumenial doctrine of the fall to a much more tightly formulated doctine of original sin...Augustine's thought decisively redirected Christian interpretation of the fall" (I.A. McFarland, In Adam's Fall: A Meditation on the Christian doctrine of Original Sin, 32).

We will see that Augustine's theory of Original Sin was based on a basic misunderstanding of the following verses which speak of the results of Adam's eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil:

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life" (Gen.3:22-24).​

First, we can understand that Adam was created in a mortal body because in order for him to live for ever it was necessary for him to eat of the Tree of Life. That idea is supported by by the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges:

"Man must be prevented from eating of the Tree of Life, and so obtaining another prerogative of Divinity, that of immortality. Man is created mortal."

Henry Alford wrote that "man was created subject to death" (Henry Alford, The Book of Genesis and Part of the Book of Exodus; A Revised Edition [London: John Childs and Son, 1872], 19).

Gerald Bray said that "Adam was not created as an immortal being, but in the garden of Eden he was protected against death. When he fell the protection was removed and he suffered the consequences as his nature was allowed to take its course " [emphasis added] (Gerald Bray, "Sin in Historical Theology," in Fallen: A Theology of Sin, 169).

We also know that when Adam ate of that tree his physical body did not undergo a change in his physical makeup. Albert Barnes wrote the following:

"The tree of the knowledge of good and evil effected a change, not in the physical constitution of man, but in his mental experience - in his knowledge of good and evil" (Albert Barnes, Barnes Notes on the Bible, Commentary at Gen.3:22).​

There is absolutely no evidence that the physical body of Adam was changed in any way at all. He died physically because he was denied the very thing which would have allowed him to live for ever--the Tree of Life. Despite this Augustine mistakenly believed that when Adam sinned he "despoiled his body":

G.F. Wiggers quoted Augustine saying the following: "If Adam had not sinned, he would not have been despoiled of his body, but would have been clothed with immortality and incorruptibility, that what is mortal should be swallowed up of life..." De Pec. Mer. I. 2, 4." [emphasis added] (G.F. Wiggers, An Historical Presentation of Augustinism and Pelagianism From the Original Sources [Andover, MA: Gould, Newman & Saxton, 1840], 92; A Reproduction by Forgotten Books).

John Calvin followed Augustine in thinking that Adam's body and his descendant's bodies are defiled as a result of concupisence, writing that "everything which is in man, from the intellect to the will, from the soul even to the flesh, is defiled and pervaded with this concupiscence; or, to express it more briefly, that the whole man is in himself nothing else than concupiscence" (John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion; 2:1:8).

So we can see that the foundation of the theory of Original Sin was built on a false idea about what happened when Adam sinned. But many people still cling to the teaching found in this theory, a theory which was first formulated during the dark ages!

Two things:

1) The time of Augustine was not the Dark Ages...the Dark Ages began after the fall of the Roman Empire. But that's not really an important point, you are simply trying to say that you are wiser because you live in modern times.

2) I don't see any Scripture in your entire post except for the text in Genesis. You can quote humanist Pelagians as much as you want, but that does not prove anything. The only source of truth and authority is Scripture. And Scripture plainly and clearly says (as I have stated on numerous occasions) that Romans 5:18-19 proves that you are wrong: "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

Of course, Jerry, you say that we are not united with Adam until we sin. But the Scripture does not say that. Paul says that by the one man's disobedience (Adam's sin) the many were made sinners. But, you do not believe the Bible, so you will not listen.

 

[God's Truth]

Many false teachings of the Catholics and even the reformed denominations have their false doctrines based on Augustine's false writings. Many Catholic priests studied the teachings of Augustine in college and accepted those writings as scripture. The protestant denominations are started by ex Catholic priests.

 

[God's Truth]

We are all born without God and need to be taught about Him.

We all are negative from conception, and continue to be so in one degree or another.

Even babies in the womb are affected by life in a negative way, and some worse than others.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Maybe you can clarify, then. Are you saying it did not change his flesh and blood body but it did affect him physically?

He died physically because he no longer had access to the very thing which would keep him alive forever. he died physically for that reason.

But there is absolutely no evidence that his flesh and blood body changed in any way when he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Albert Barnes wrote the following:

"The tree of the knowledge of good and evil effected a change, not in the physical constitution of man, but in his mental experience - in his knowledge of good and evil" (Albert Barnes, Barnes Notes on the Bible, Commentary at Gen.3:22).​

 

[God's Truth]

He died physically because he no longer had access to the very thing which would keep him alive forever. he died physically for that reason.

But there is absolutely no evidence that his flesh and blood body changed in any way when he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Albert Barnes wrote the following:

"The tree of the knowledge of good and evil effected a change, not in the physical constitution of man, but in his mental experience - in his knowledge of good and evil" (Albert Barnes, Barnes Notes on the Bible, Commentary at Gen.3:22).​

You are wrong. God removed Adam and Eve from Himself.

Genesis 3:24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The time of Augustine was not the Dark Ages...the Dark Ages began after the fall of the Roman Empire. But that's not really an important point, you are simply trying to say that you are wiser because you live in modern times.

I define the Dark Age in the church as the time prior to Martin Luther.

I don't see any Scripture in your entire post except for the text in Genesis.

That is because I am showing that Augustine had a misunderstanding about those verses which I quoted.

You can quote humanist Pelagians as much as you want, but that does not prove anything.

Which humanist Pelagian did I quote? And where is your proof that anyone who I quoted is a humanist Pelagian?

The only source of truth and authority is Scripture. And Scripture plainly and clearly says (as I have stated on numerous occasions) that Romans 5:18-19 proves that you are wrong: "Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous."

Douglas Moo, who supports the false theory of Orignial Sin, said the following about those verses:

"Paul in verse 12 asserts that all people die because of their own account; and in verses 18-19 he claims they die because of Adam's sin. Paul does not resolve these two perspectives; and we do wrong to try to force a resolution that Paul himself never made" [emphasis added] (Douglas J. Moo, Fallen:A Theology of Sin, 123).​

Henry Blocher, another advocate of the false theory, wrote the following:

"It is rather strange that the core idea, or the hinge of the apostle's purpoted logic - that Adam communicated the sinful bent to his posterity - should not be expressed at all in the passage. It 'might' be explicit; undoubtedly, Paul did share the opinion; yet how surprising that he should not include something here, of all places, to make it clear!" [emphasis added] (Henri Blocher, Original Sin: Illuminating the Riddle, 66).​

The whole theory of Original Sin is based on nothing but speculation about the verses which you quoted and it is a simple thing to prove that that speculation has no basis in fact.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You are wrong. God removed Adam and Eve from Himself.

Genesis 3:24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.

I said the following and nothing which I said contradicts Genesis 3:24:

He died physically because he no longer had access to the very thing which would keep him alive forever. He died physically for that reason.​

 

[God's Truth]

I said the following and nothing which I said contradicts Genesis 3:24:

He died physically because he no longer had access to the very thing which would keep him alive forever. He died physically for that reason.​

No. We die physically because God says man is sinful and He doesn't want man to live forever.

When God removed Adam and Eve from the tree of life, God removed Adam and Eve from Himself.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

-DELETED-

 

[Jerry Shugart]

No. We die physically because God says man is sinful and He doesn't want man to live forever.

People die physically because they do not have access to the Tree of Life:

"And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever: Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life" (Gen.3:22-24).​

 

[God's Truth]

The original sin of Adam and Eve had Adam and Eve thrown out; thus, all of mankind thrown out.

Genesis 3:21 The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them. 22Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- 23.therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken.

I thought you were speaking against that, JS.

So excuse me on that. You seem to have contradicting beliefs. I do want to say that man still had a long lifespan, but God cut down man's life span even further after that.

I am not sure how you get that original sin has no truth in it since we were cast away from God.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You seem to have contradicting beliefs.

I have been consistent from the beginning.

Now please answer my question.

In order for Adam to live forever was it necessary for him to eat of the Tree of Life?

 

[john w]

The punk is morphing into Pate, as he has started another thread, on the same subject, to "prove" that he is always right.

 

[God's Truth]

I have been consistent from the beginning.

Now please answer my question.

In order for Adam to live forever was it necessary for him to eat of the Tree of Life?

Yes.

But see how Adam and Eve were cast out from God?

So why don't you think there is at least a type of original sin, since we were cast out?

 

[God's Truth]

The punk is morphing into Pate, as he has started another thread, on the same subject, to "prove" that he is always right.

Some people understand there are more points to make about one scripture.

Why do you want it to be boring here?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Yes.

So you see that it was because Adam was denied access to the Tree of Life that he died physically.