The video is literally titled “are we born GUILTY of sin?” Not “are we born under sin?” All of these people accusing His Grace Bishop Irenei of heresy prove the exact point of his video; that they believe in an un-Orthodox conception of original sin.
Have you listened attentively? Around 4:00, "every human being is born pure as Adam was fashioned pure". Now, I am an ignorant man, but I read a few books on the subject, and I can't reconcile the above with the Orthodox catechism. For the record, I am not accusing His Grace of heresy; I think he misspoke; but the words above are dangerous because they can be interpreted in a heretical way by an ignorant man like myself.
@@moontyk That's just nonsensical. Saints, not mere bishops, have misspoken and made mistakes and even fell -- and then repented and corrected themselves.
Thank you Your Eminence. People sin not Natures. Our nature inherits the EFFECTS of Sin from Adam, not the Guilt. As Saint John of Damascus says “The root of all heresies is the confusion of Person and Nature”- On the Orthodox Faith
The quote you cite is not relevant to the matter. There's a reason why all people sin, because our nature is corrupted. It's why we must all be reborn in Christ (baptism) to be saved. Philosophically, the human logos is not sinful, but its tropos is.
@@marcuswilliams7448Augustinian Original sin isn’t Orthodox. It’s the notion of inherited guilt within the nature of man, rather than an illness and a proclivity towards that which is misaligned from God. Human nature is restored by its enhypostatization in the Logos.
"Our nature contracted the disease of sin because of the disobedience of one man, that is Adam, and thus many became sinners. This was not because they sinned along with Adam, because they did not then exist, but because they had the same nature as Adam, which fell under the law of sin… the whole nature of man became guilty in the person of him who was first formed." + St Cyril of Alexandria
@@MinaDKSBMSB Gerald Bray, ed., Romans, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 142-43.
"Original sin is inherited and transferred to all men-When we accept human nature from Adam, we also accept sinful corruption, which is why people are born "children of wrath by nature", because the righteous wrath of God rests on Adam's sin-infected nature" (St. Justin Popovich)
@@AndMakrid “Therefore, if anyone, having experienced beforehand such disgrace and insignificance, shall then become proud, is he not senseless and blind? That saying that calls no one sinless except God, even though he has lived only one day on earth, does not refer to those who sin personally, because how can a one-day old child sin? But in this is expressed that mystery of our Faith, that human nature is sinful from its very conception. God did not create man sinful, but pure and holy. But since the first-created Adam lost this garment of sanctity, not from any other sin but from pride alone, and became corruptible and mortal, all people also who come from the seed of Adam are participants of the ancestral sin from their very conception and birth. He who has been born in this way, even though he has not yet performed any sin, is already sinful through this ancestral sin” (St. Symeon the New Theologian, Homily 37).
@@TheRadChadDad Yes, but His Grace said (4:00-ish), "every human being is born pure as Adam". Which is at odds with what I know about Orthodox soteriology.
God bless you, Your Eminence. I always really appreciate your reflections. This distinction about sin was one of the big turning points in my investigation into Orthodoxy and eventually becoming a catechumen. (Newly illumined as of this Lazarus Saturday!)
I have to defend Bishop Irenei here from the accusations of heresy. He is not saying that humans are born without sin (he explicitly states that the power of sin touches all of us even before we open our eyes as babies). He is saying this against the argument that we are guilty of sinning from the womb because of the sins that our parents committed. I believe in a just God, and I can’t imagine that God would judge us because of something that we had no control over! Of course I cannot know God’s judgement fully, but I don’t believe that I am to be condemned because of what my parents did-this is not fair and just for me or them. The “born spotless” remark may be overly going the other direction, but please don’t take that and ignore the rest of the video. Let’s be critical thinkers here.
Dr Michael Heiser also tackled this idea of original sin, and it stems in no small part from Augustine, who, a preferred Latinist, used defective manuscripts to arrive at this concept of original sin. This is heresy. We are born with the capacity to sin, but we don’t inherit guilt. If one believes one is born with the guilt of Adam, for the sake of consistency you then are telling parents who suffered the death of a newborn that their child is in damnation. Is that truly congruent with the character of God, who is both most compassionate and the just judge?
@@johnsambo9379 Excellent - it is humorous how some here would argue that we can participate in the divine nature of the last Adam into whom we are born but not (apparently) that of the first Adam out of whom we are born!
I don’t think His Grace is making an outright theological statement here: he’s saying infants aren’t born sinning. They’re incapable of it. But they’re also incapable of practicing virtue. They can’t disobey God, but they also can’t actively obey Him. They’re not storing up treasures in Heaven. I think St. Gregory talks about that when he discusses what happens to infants who die. I think people in the comments are going way too deep into an Original Sin argument that isn’t required.
@PatristicNectarFilms Father, Are you saying, then, that we have a capacity to sin because of this "ancestral sin", as compared to the Catholic dogma of concupiscence?
“In Adam we became co-inheritors of the curse, not as if we disobeyed that divine commandment with him but because he became mortal and transmitted sin through his seed. We became mortals from a mortal…” - St Anastasius of Sinai, Questions and Answers “Human nature is sinful from its very conception. God did not create man sinful, but pure and holy. But since the first-created Adam lost this garment of sanctity, not from any other sin than pride alone, and became corruptible and mortal, all people also who came from the seed of Adam are participants of the ancestral sin from their very conception and birth. He who has been born in this way, even though he has not yet performed any sin, is already sinful through this ancestral sin.” “Thus, in soul Adam died immediately, as soon as he had tasted [from the fruit of that tree from which God had commanded him not to taste, threatening him that if he should only taste of it he should die]; and later, after nine hundred and thirty years, he died also in body. For, as the death of the body is the separation of it of the soul, so the death of the soul is the separation from it of the Holy Spirit… Later, for this reason, the whole human race also became such as our forefather Adam became through the fall - mortal, that is, both in soul and body. Man such as God had created him no longer existed in the World.”- St Symeon the New Theologian, Homily 37:3; Homily 45:3 “If the conception of God had been from seed, He would not have been a new man, nor the Author of new life which will never grow old. If He were from the old stock and had inherited its sin, He would not have been able to bear within Himself the fullness of the incorruptible Godhead or to make His Flesh an inexhaustible Source of sanctification, able to wash away even the defilement of our First Parents by its abundant power, and sufficient to sanctify all who came after them.” - St Gregory of Palamas, Homily 14:5 “Everyone in the following of Adam has died, because they have all inherited their nature from him. But some have died because they themselves have sinned, while others have died only because of Adam’s condemnation - for example, children” - St Gennadius Scholarius “In Adam I fell, in Adam I was cast out of paradise, in Adam I died. How shall God call me back, except He find me in Adam? For just as in Adam I am guilty of sin and owe a debt to death, so in Christ I am justified.” - St Ambrose of Milan, On the Death of His Brother Satyrus
@PatristicNectarFilms Please help me out here, because I don't know if this is right: clearly, a newborn has not committed any form of sin, including eating from the forbidden tree. Therefore, theoretically, the newborn does not need Confession and Repentance (letting aside their physical impossibility). However, the newborn needs Baptism because of the inherited consequences (= fall-ness) of Adam and Eve’s sin. Is this right?
Purpose of the Baptism is to plant a seed of the divine nature in the baptized that has potential of growing and deifying person in the process - Theosis.
Father forgive, I am but a laymen, I have no right to speak against you, I speak as a fool, as a proud fool. Maybe my pride is getting the best of me. I am sure that you only wanted to do us good. But father, I have been taught that we are all sinful in our nature, we are not born pure, and this is why our Lord came to save us, and this is also why He sent us prophets and teachers, for us to understand and find the right way, because He knew our sinfulness and our corruption. I am a sinner, which means that I am entitled to be helped by God, not that I am entitled to be punished by Him If I have misunderstood please clarify for me my misunderstanding, I will obey, if this is Gods will. Please forgive all misconveniences and excuse my brothers and sisters for their verbal assaults, they are only trying to protect you and our faith from misunderstandings and misconceptions, they mean no harm. Pray for us dear father! Amen!.
As an ordinary part of the human race, born into the world the ordinary way, Mary was not without sin. Romans 3:23 teaches that all have sinned and fall short of God’s glory, and there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that Mary was an exception to this rule. The apostle John wrote, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us” (1 John 1:8-10). The “we” in this passage includes Mary, the mother of Jesus. To claim Mary is without sin is an example of “deceit.”
Bishop Irenei (pardon if i misspelled) clearly states we are born pure as Adam as was born pure; which means we are born with the same guilt as Adam, which is none. He never said we are born in the same state. Prior to this, he explicitly states that sin is all around us, affecting the world. The implication is obvious: sin affects everything in the world, which means us, even in the womb; however, we are NOT BORN WITH ANY GUILT. And isn’t that what the title states? How are so many getting this wrong? His words are pretty clear.
Makes sense to me; this is a topic that is victim to overcomplication. Remember "the kingdom of God is for those like children" (paraphrasing). Children are innocent. If sin is an offense or crime, then children are not born having committed crimes or offences themselves. But the world and man's nature since the fall means all people are susceptible. Technically it is possible to be without sin, as not just the Son of God is but also His mother the Virgin Mary. She was without sin, but still subject to the consequences of mankind's fall (death, etc).
Romans declares we are in the sin of Adam thru whom it came upon us all. To veer here is to end up in a really wrong direction. If previous counsels declared it so as we see, why change it up with NO authority?? Then walk it back with word salad? And why then revolt against the Immaculate Conception Dogma. Methinks its just a deeply resistant stance against the authority of the Chair of Peter and an attempt to not come anywhere near RC because that would mean metanoia. And dont disparage RC who has done more social work in the world than any other. As a true church should. Love you though… isnt this why we need the second Adam - Christ- for new life? because of the fall of man due to the first?
Mary the mother of Jesus was a godly and blessed woman, but she was not without sin. Jesus was the only human without sin. Jesus “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21). “In him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). Nothing of the sort is ever said of Mary or anyone else. Jesus Christ is fully human, but He is also fully God (John 1:1). He is the Lamb of God, “without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19), a title and description no other person can claim.
To help bolster their teaching that Mary was sinless, the Roman Catholic Church has invented the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (formally accepted as Catholic dogma in 1854). According to this false teaching, Mary was, from her very conception in her mother’s womb, “preserved free from all stain of original sin.” That is, Mary had no sinful nature. This doctrine is neither biblical nor necessary. The virgin-born Christ Jesus was free from the stain of original sin, but it was not necessary for His mother to be-or His grandmother-or His great-grandmother, etc. How far back would we have to go to insure Jesus’ perfection, if it were necessary for Mary to be sinless?
@@johnsambo9379 she herself stated that ‘I am the Immaculate Conception’ in the Lourdes apparition which is approved, your argument, then, is with the Mother of God!
St. Symeon the New Theologian, Homily on Ancestral Sin and our Regeneration That saying that calls no one sinless except God, even though he has lived only one day on earth, does not refer to those who sin personally, because how can a one-day old child sin? But in this is expressed that mystery of our Faith, that human nature is sinful from its very conception. God did not create man sinful, but pure and holy. But since the first-created Adam lost this garment of sanctity, not from any other sin but from pride alone, and became corruptible and mortal, all people also who come from the seed of Adam are participants of the ancestral sin from their very conception and birth. He who has been born in this way, even though he has not yet performed any sin, is already sinful through this ancestral sin.
@@Wgm69 Christ is risen! I don't think his eminence intended to word matters that there is a perfect equivalency between us and Adam. It appears what was trying to be communicated is that we do not inherit literal guilt.
Mary the mother of Jesus was a godly and blessed woman, but she was not without sin. Jesus was the only human without sin. Jesus “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21). “In him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). Nothing of the sort is ever said of Mary or anyone else. Jesus Christ is fully human, but He is also fully God (John 1:1). He is the Lamb of God, “without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19), a title and description no other person can claim.
In the conception of each human being (the whole of him) is God involved? Do we say that the conception of each human being is a direct act of God, as Creator? To say that God weaves sin into the origin of each human being (of whom He is his creator) - into the instance of each man's conception - is a heresy by what name? Or is God, as creator, so removed, by multiple degrees of distance, from the conception of each human being it makes little difference; the genesis of each human being doesn't concern him. Doesn't touch him for he is not directly involved in the conception of any human being, He is only Creator, nominally. He does not directly weave the fabric of the instance of each human life. With God not there sin can, therefore, be the weaver. Or, it's other. God is Creator. He is the Originator of each man's origin. With God being that much there, He creates *with* sin (threading the fabric) or He creates *without* sin threading his weaving, Which is it?
Neither. Human nature was once created with Adam and had suffered corruption at the first sin he committed. With new person being conceived, human nature is inherited from the parents, and is not re-created in each person as it was with the Adam. What is created at conception is the soul, unique and not pre-existing.
To help bolster their teaching that Mary was sinless, the Roman Catholic Church has invented the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (formally accepted as Catholic dogma in 1854). According to this false teaching, Mary was, from her very conception in her mother’s womb, “preserved free from all stain of original sin.” That is, Mary had no sinful nature. This doctrine is neither biblical nor necessary. The virgin-born Christ Jesus was free from the stain of original sin, but it was not necessary for His mother to be-or His grandmother-or His great-grandmother, etc. How far back would we have to go to insure Jesus’ perfection, if it were necessary for Mary to be sinless?
Interesting. Patriarch Jeremias II, in writing to the Lutheran theologians in Tubingen, said that they agreed with Article II of the Augustana on Original Sin.
@@P-el4zd He knew very little about the Greeks. What he knew from them, however, is that the claim of papal supremacy was clearly false, as Christianity had flourished apart from the Roman bishop for 500 years.
We believe in original sin but St Justin popovich points out we still have human freedom to do natural good accoridnt to divine scripture Romans. 2:14-15, 7:19 we are still tainted with sin in our souls and need baptism to correct this.
@@shiningdiamond5046 The Lutherans agree that, in things below us we have freedom, but in things above us, the will must be set free in conversion in order, thereafter, to cooperate with the Holy Spirit.
We are born with Adam's sinful nature and we also inherit the guilt. Please speak the trurh on what the Bible actually teaches not what you want it to say because you contradict the Bible. Adams sin passed on death to everyone and thats what the worrd of teaches. It's not just the capacity to sin...we are born sinners with guilt and penalty and all and the only way to reverse that is to be adopted into Gods family by being born gain, being born from above. Thats why the Bible teaches that when we receive Jesus we have passed from death to life. I mean Rimans and other scriptures coukdnt ve more cleaerer but its sad how in order to accomodate a church doctrune scripture is twisted and manipulated just like how Calvanists twist scripture regarding Calvanism. Catholic church diesnt want to accept this because then they know that Mary was virn with sin as well and she is by bo means divine un nature like God..thats a heresy. Mary was chosen to fulfill the work of God just lije the apostles and Moses and others and the only reason why she was able to conceive and bear Hesus in her womb, was the work of the Holy Spirit and the agoky Spirit made ut possible and there is no other reason. Yes Mary found favir in Gods eyes just like the Vible says God found favor with Noah!
So, according to you, the Bible teaches that every newborn child must pay a penalty for only being alive. This is the best argument in favour of abortion one could ever imagine...
The video is literally titled “are we born GUILTY of sin?” Not “are we born under sin?” All of these people accusing His Grace Bishop Irenei of heresy prove the exact point of his video; that they believe in an un-Orthodox conception of original sin.
Christ is risen!
Have you listened attentively? Around 4:00, "every human being is born pure as Adam was fashioned pure".
Now, I am an ignorant man, but I read a few books on the subject, and I can't reconcile the above with the Orthodox catechism.
For the record, I am not accusing His Grace of heresy; I think he misspoke; but the words above are dangerous because they can be interpreted in a heretical way by an ignorant man like myself.
@@vsevolodtokarev you cannot misspeak as a bishop, which should uphold the right faith and dogma with precision to the dot
@@moontyk That's just nonsensical. Saints, not mere bishops, have misspoken and made mistakes and even fell -- and then repented and corrected themselves.
@@vsevolodtokarev on youtube you can just edit the video or upload a new one, if you say a heresy and become aware of it
Thank you Your Eminence. People sin not Natures. Our nature inherits the EFFECTS of Sin from Adam, not the Guilt.
As Saint John of Damascus says
“The root of all heresies is the confusion of Person and Nature”- On the Orthodox Faith
Original Sin is a deprivation of Original Righteousness. It is not the confession that natures sin.
The quote you cite is not relevant to the matter. There's a reason why all people sin, because our nature is corrupted. It's why we must all be reborn in Christ (baptism) to be saved. Philosophically, the human logos is not sinful, but its tropos is.
@@marcuswilliams7448Augustinian Original sin isn’t Orthodox. It’s the notion of inherited guilt within the nature of man, rather than an illness and a proclivity towards that which is misaligned from God. Human nature is restored by its enhypostatization in the Logos.
@@living_orthodox I didn't mention Augustine. You Orthoverts have an unhealthy obsession with hating the West.
❤☦ CHRIST IS RISEN ☦❤
❤💪🙏☦ GOD HAVE MERCY ON US SINNERS ☦🙏⛪️🕊
"Our nature contracted the disease of sin because of the disobedience of one man, that is Adam, and thus many became sinners. This was not because they sinned along with Adam, because they did not then exist, but because they had the same nature as Adam, which fell under the law of sin… the whole nature of man became guilty in the person of him who was first formed."
+ St Cyril of Alexandria
Where is this from please? Thank you
@@MinaDKSBMSB Gerald Bray, ed., Romans, Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2005), 142-43.
"Original sin is inherited and transferred to all men-When we accept human nature from Adam, we also accept sinful corruption, which is why people are born "children of wrath by nature", because the righteous wrath of God rests on Adam's sin-infected nature"
(St. Justin Popovich)
Sin-infected. Not sinfull per se.
@@AndMakrid “Therefore, if anyone, having experienced beforehand such disgrace and insignificance, shall then become proud, is he not senseless and blind? That saying that calls no one sinless except God, even though he has lived only one day on earth, does not refer to those who sin personally, because how can a one-day old child sin? But in this is expressed that mystery of our Faith, that human nature is sinful from its very conception. God did not create man sinful, but pure and holy. But since the first-created Adam lost this garment of sanctity, not from any other sin but from pride alone, and became corruptible and mortal, all people also who come from the seed of Adam are participants of the ancestral sin from their very conception and birth. He who has been born in this way, even though he has not yet performed any sin, is already sinful through this ancestral sin” (St. Symeon the New Theologian, Homily 37).
Original sin is NOT the same thing as imputed guilt (i.e. all Western theology).
@@TheRadChadDad and imputed guilt is not the same thing as Orthodox inherited guilt, which is seen as a natural debt as in St. Maximus.
@@TheRadChadDad Yes, but His Grace said (4:00-ish), "every human being is born pure as Adam". Which is at odds with what I know about Orthodox soteriology.
Excellent video!
And it looks like all 429 Twitter inquisitors have found it as well.
God bless you, Your Eminence. I always really appreciate your reflections. This distinction about sin was one of the big turning points in my investigation into Orthodoxy and eventually becoming a catechumen. (Newly illumined as of this Lazarus Saturday!)
Thank you very much, your Grace
Glory to God father, thank you. Christ is risen.
This is some comment section, calling the Russian Orthodox bishop a heretic! Sad!
He wouldn’t be the first bishop to fall into heresy.
I have to defend Bishop Irenei here from the accusations of heresy. He is not saying that humans are born without sin (he explicitly states that the power of sin touches all of us even before we open our eyes as babies). He is saying this against the argument that we are guilty of sinning from the womb because of the sins that our parents committed. I believe in a just God, and I can’t imagine that God would judge us because of something that we had no control over! Of course I cannot know God’s judgement fully, but I don’t believe that I am to be condemned because of what my parents did-this is not fair and just for me or them.
The “born spotless” remark may be overly going the other direction, but please don’t take that and ignore the rest of the video. Let’s be critical thinkers here.
Truly insightful
Dr Michael Heiser also tackled this idea of original sin, and it stems in no small part from Augustine, who, a preferred Latinist, used defective manuscripts to arrive at this concept of original sin. This is heresy. We are born with the capacity to sin, but we don’t inherit guilt.
If one believes one is born with the guilt of Adam, for the sake of consistency you then are telling parents who suffered the death of a newborn that their child is in damnation. Is that truly congruent with the character of God, who is both most compassionate and the just judge?
Every human dies and therefore every human sins. You are talking circles.
@@johnsambo9379 Nope.
100% Ben.
People Sin, not Natures.
@@johnsambo9379 Excellent - it is humorous how some here would argue that we can participate in the divine nature of the last Adam into whom we are born but not (apparently) that of the first Adam out of whom we are born!
Haven’t you noticed how infants and toddlers attention within the sanctuary is often up in air?
They see the hosts around us, because they can.
no, that's silly
@@Big_Steve11 you haven’t seen it I take it
Their spiritual eyes are illumined by baptism.
Meow @ the 50 second mark
I don’t think His Grace is making an outright theological statement here: he’s saying infants aren’t born sinning. They’re incapable of it. But they’re also incapable of practicing virtue. They can’t disobey God, but they also can’t actively obey Him. They’re not storing up treasures in Heaven. I think St. Gregory talks about that when he discusses what happens to infants who die.
I think people in the comments are going way too deep into an Original Sin argument that isn’t required.
@PatristicNectarFilms
Father,
Are you saying, then, that we have a capacity to sin because of this "ancestral sin", as compared to the Catholic dogma of concupiscence?
“In Adam we became co-inheritors of the curse, not as if we disobeyed that divine commandment with him but because he became mortal and transmitted sin through his seed. We became mortals from a mortal…” - St Anastasius of Sinai, Questions and Answers
“Human nature is sinful from its very conception. God did not create man sinful, but pure and holy. But since the first-created Adam lost this garment of sanctity, not from any other sin than pride alone, and became corruptible and mortal, all people also who came from the seed of Adam are participants of the ancestral sin from their very conception and birth. He who has been born in this way, even though he has not yet performed any sin, is already sinful through this ancestral sin.”
“Thus, in soul Adam died immediately, as soon as he had tasted [from the fruit of that tree from which God had commanded him not to taste, threatening him that if he should only taste of it he should die]; and later, after nine hundred and thirty years, he died also in body. For, as the death of the body is the separation of it of the soul, so the death of the soul is the separation from it of the Holy Spirit… Later, for this reason, the whole human race also became such as our forefather Adam became through the fall - mortal, that is, both in soul and body. Man such as God had created him no longer existed in the World.”- St Symeon the New Theologian, Homily 37:3; Homily 45:3
“If the conception of God had been from seed, He would not have been a new man, nor the Author of new life which will never grow old. If He were from the old stock and had inherited its sin, He would not have been able to bear within Himself the fullness of the incorruptible Godhead or to make His Flesh an inexhaustible Source of sanctification, able to wash away even the defilement of our First Parents by its abundant power, and sufficient to sanctify all who came after them.” - St Gregory of Palamas, Homily 14:5
“Everyone in the following of Adam has died, because they have all inherited their nature from him. But some have died because they themselves have sinned, while others have died only because of Adam’s condemnation - for example, children” - St Gennadius Scholarius
“In Adam I fell, in Adam I was cast out of paradise, in Adam I died. How shall God call me back, except He find me in Adam? For just as in Adam I am guilty of sin and owe a debt to death, so in Christ I am justified.” - St Ambrose of Milan, On the Death of His Brother Satyrus
@PatristicNectarFilms Please help me out here, because I don't know if this is right: clearly, a newborn has not committed any form of sin, including eating from the forbidden tree. Therefore, theoretically, the newborn does not need Confession and Repentance (letting aside their physical impossibility). However, the newborn needs Baptism because of the inherited consequences (= fall-ness) of Adam and Eve’s sin. Is this right?
Baptism isn't just about the remission of sins. For start non Baptised can't take communion, that's the most important reason to baptize kids.
Purpose of the Baptism is to plant a seed of the divine nature in the baptized that has potential of growing and deifying person in the process - Theosis.
Yes, you're right.
Go read Ezekiel 18. God addresses this clearly.
Father forgive, I am but a laymen, I have no right to speak against you, I speak as a fool, as a proud fool. Maybe my pride is getting the best of me. I am sure that you only wanted to do us good. But father, I have been taught that we are all sinful in our nature, we are not born pure, and this is why our Lord came to save us, and this is also why He sent us prophets and teachers, for us to understand and find the right way, because He knew our sinfulness and our corruption. I am a sinner, which means that I am entitled to be helped by God, not that I am entitled to be punished by Him
If I have misunderstood please clarify for me my misunderstanding, I will obey, if this is Gods will. Please forgive all misconveniences and excuse my brothers and sisters for their verbal assaults, they are only trying to protect you and our faith from misunderstandings and misconceptions, they mean no harm.
Pray for us dear father!
Amen!.
As an ordinary part of the human race, born into the world the ordinary way, Mary was not without sin. Romans 3:23 teaches that all have sinned and fall short of God’s glory, and there is nothing in the Bible to suggest that Mary was an exception to this rule. The apostle John wrote, “If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us” (1 John 1:8-10). The “we” in this passage includes Mary, the mother of Jesus. To claim Mary is without sin is an example of “deceit.”
Stop quote mining.
❤❤❤ thank you
We are made exactly as god intended, meaning it’s all his fault if we are indeed born of sin.
Bishop Irenei (pardon if i misspelled) clearly states we are born pure as Adam as was born pure; which means we are born with the same guilt as Adam, which is none. He never said we are born in the same state. Prior to this, he explicitly states that sin is all around us, affecting the world. The implication is obvious: sin affects everything in the world, which means us, even in the womb; however, we are NOT BORN WITH ANY GUILT. And isn’t that what the title states? How are so many getting this wrong? His words are pretty clear.
Amen
Makes sense to me; this is a topic that is victim to overcomplication. Remember "the kingdom of God is for those like children" (paraphrasing). Children are innocent. If sin is an offense or crime, then children are not born having committed crimes or offences themselves. But the world and man's nature since the fall means all people are susceptible. Technically it is possible to be without sin, as not just the Son of God is but also His mother the Virgin Mary. She was without sin, but still subject to the consequences of mankind's fall (death, etc).
Romans declares we are in the sin of Adam thru whom it came upon us all. To veer here is to end up in a really wrong direction. If previous counsels declared it so as we see, why change it up with NO authority?? Then walk it back with word salad? And why then revolt against the Immaculate Conception Dogma. Methinks its just a deeply resistant stance against the authority of the Chair of Peter and an attempt to not come anywhere near RC because that would mean metanoia. And dont disparage RC who has done more social work in the world than any other. As a true church should. Love you though… isnt this why we need the second Adam - Christ- for new life? because of the fall of man due to the first?
That's a modern Catholic teaching that Mary was without sin.
Mary the mother of Jesus was a godly and blessed woman, but she was not without sin. Jesus was the only human without sin. Jesus “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21). “In him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). Nothing of the sort is ever said of Mary or anyone else. Jesus Christ is fully human, but He is also fully God (John 1:1). He is the Lamb of God, “without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19), a title and description no other person can claim.
To help bolster their teaching that Mary was sinless, the Roman Catholic Church has invented the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (formally accepted as Catholic dogma in 1854). According to this false teaching, Mary was, from her very conception in her mother’s womb, “preserved free from all stain of original sin.” That is, Mary had no sinful nature. This doctrine is neither biblical nor necessary. The virgin-born Christ Jesus was free from the stain of original sin, but it was not necessary for His mother to be-or His grandmother-or His great-grandmother, etc. How far back would we have to go to insure Jesus’ perfection, if it were necessary for Mary to be sinless?
@@johnsambo9379 she herself stated that ‘I am the Immaculate Conception’ in the Lourdes apparition which is approved, your argument, then, is with the Mother of God!
St. Symeon the New Theologian, Homily on Ancestral Sin and our Regeneration
That saying that calls no one sinless except God, even though he has lived only one day on earth, does not refer to those who sin personally, because how can a one-day old child sin? But in this is expressed that mystery of our Faith, that human nature is sinful from its very conception. God did not create man sinful, but pure and holy. But since the first-created Adam lost this garment of sanctity, not from any other sin but from pride alone, and became corruptible and mortal, all people also who come from the seed of Adam are participants of the ancestral sin from their very conception and birth. He who has been born in this way, even though he has not yet performed any sin, is already sinful through this ancestral sin.
Cristo vive
0:50
This could have been worded better, regrettably.
@@Wgm69 Christ is risen! I don't think his eminence intended to word matters that there is a perfect equivalency between us and Adam. It appears what was trying to be communicated is that we do not inherit literal guilt.
@@Wgm69 It is rather clear I am trying to justify his eminence.
@@Wgm69 watch your mouth
How would it have been worded better?
@St.MichealTheArkAngel that we aren't personally guilty of original sin as if we committed it but that we can still be condemned for it
Excellent video that really reveals light to those who would latinize the faith. Leave it to latinizers to get basics wrong.
Mary the mother of Jesus was a godly and blessed woman, but she was not without sin. Jesus was the only human without sin. Jesus “had no sin” (2 Corinthians 5:21). “In him is no sin” (1 John 3:5). Nothing of the sort is ever said of Mary or anyone else. Jesus Christ is fully human, but He is also fully God (John 1:1). He is the Lamb of God, “without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19), a title and description no other person can claim.
Only the Lord had no sin. Mother of God had the original sin, but no personal sin ( St Siluan the Athonite had this revelation)
In the conception of each human being (the whole of him) is God involved? Do we say that the conception of each human being is a direct act of God, as Creator? To say that God weaves sin into the origin of each human being (of whom He is his creator) - into the instance of each man's conception - is a heresy by what name? Or is God, as creator, so removed, by multiple degrees of distance, from the conception of each human being it makes little difference; the genesis of each human being doesn't concern him. Doesn't touch him for he is not directly involved in the conception of any human being, He is only Creator, nominally. He does not directly weave the fabric of the instance of each human life. With God not there sin can, therefore, be the weaver.
Or, it's other. God is Creator. He is the Originator of each man's origin. With God being that much there, He creates *with* sin (threading the fabric) or He creates *without* sin threading his weaving,
Which is it?
Traducianism
Neither. Human nature was once created with Adam and had suffered corruption at the first sin he committed. With new person being conceived, human nature is inherited from the parents, and is not re-created in each person as it was with the Adam. What is created at conception is the soul, unique and not pre-existing.
To help bolster their teaching that Mary was sinless, the Roman Catholic Church has invented the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (formally accepted as Catholic dogma in 1854). According to this false teaching, Mary was, from her very conception in her mother’s womb, “preserved free from all stain of original sin.” That is, Mary had no sinful nature. This doctrine is neither biblical nor necessary. The virgin-born Christ Jesus was free from the stain of original sin, but it was not necessary for His mother to be-or His grandmother-or His great-grandmother, etc. How far back would we have to go to insure Jesus’ perfection, if it were necessary for Mary to be sinless?
I think the farthest the idea goes is saints Joachim and Anna having a dispassionate Union to make the Virgin Mary like a marriage without lust
We're Orthodox not Roman Catholic so this is irrelevant
Interesting. Patriarch Jeremias II, in writing to the Lutheran theologians in Tubingen, said that they agreed with Article II of the Augustana on Original Sin.
Luther was right. "The truth lies with the Greeks" - Martin Luther, 1519
@@P-el4zd He knew very little about the Greeks. What he knew from them, however, is that the claim of papal supremacy was clearly false, as Christianity had flourished apart from the Roman bishop for 500 years.
We believe in original sin but St Justin popovich points out we still have human freedom to do natural good accoridnt to divine scripture Romans. 2:14-15, 7:19 we are still tainted with sin in our souls and need baptism to correct this.
@@shiningdiamond5046 The Lutherans agree that, in things below us we have freedom, but in things above us, the will must be set free in conversion in order, thereafter, to cooperate with the Holy Spirit.
@@marcuswilliams7448 So you agree with St Justin popovich and Gregory palamas? Thanks you're slowly on the path to Orthodoxy
looks like the moggy has an opinion as well
We are born with Adam's sinful nature and we also inherit the guilt. Please speak the trurh on what the Bible actually teaches not what you want it to say because you contradict the Bible. Adams sin passed on death to everyone and thats what the worrd of teaches. It's not just the capacity to sin...we are born sinners with guilt and penalty and all and the only way to reverse that is to be adopted into Gods family by being born gain, being born from above. Thats why the Bible teaches that when we receive Jesus we have passed from death to life. I mean Rimans and other scriptures coukdnt ve more cleaerer but its sad how in order to accomodate a church doctrune scripture is twisted and manipulated just like how Calvanists twist scripture regarding Calvanism. Catholic church diesnt want to accept this because then they know that Mary was virn with sin as well and she is by bo means divine un nature like God..thats a heresy. Mary was chosen to fulfill the work of God just lije the apostles and Moses and others and the only reason why she was able to conceive and bear Hesus in her womb, was the work of the Holy Spirit and the agoky Spirit made ut possible and there is no other reason. Yes Mary found favir in Gods eyes just like the Vible says God found favor with Noah!
So, according to you, the Bible teaches that every newborn child must pay a penalty for only being alive.
This is the best argument in favour of abortion one could ever imagine...
Why is a laywoman attempting to reprove a bishop
Nuh... Guilt inheritance is one out of many heresies of the Latins.
@@johnnyd2383then why does St. Gregory the Theologian teach that unbaptized infants who die will not be glorified nor punished?
🙏💗☦️💐