What Is Original Sin?
Thank you for your ministry. I am having discussions with my Adventist friends again. It’s going much better than previously. We are both more open to hearing each other.
Our current topic is original sin. What is the best way to explain to explain to an Adventist the state of being spiritually dead? Also, what is the difference between original sin and the act of sin?
Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing from you.
—VIA EMAIL
Response: I understand your questions. I’ll try to give an overview answer to you, and then I’ll link some resources.
First, the issue of “original sin” and spiritual death is THE thing that Adventists deny. By denying that humans have immaterial spirits that are born dead in sin, they miss everything significant about Jesus’ incarnation, death, and resurrection.
Because Adventists deny that humans are spirit-beings housed in flesh (as 2 Corinthians 5:1–9 makes very clear), they don’t understand spiritual death and our innate sinfulness.
Because Adventists deny the existence of the human spirit, they have no way to understand the literal meaning of John 4:24 when Jesus told the Samaritan woman that God is spirit, and true worshipers must worship Him in spirit and in truth.
Adventism was founded on the basis of believing in a physical god who was NOT spirit. They then defined humans as not having a spirit, and the only way they understand sin is as literal behaviors, physical acts, that break the law. They do not believe that the are BY NATURE spiritually dead because they don’t believe they have a spirit that is by nature dead and must be born again. These should help explain SIN and the nature of sin as well as original sin and Jesus’ temptations.
Did you watch this year’s FAF conference?
I’ll give you some links to some sessions that should be helpful. In my first session I address the physical definition of Adventist reality and how that obscures the reality of new birth and the gospel. I will also share my second talk about salvation being about believing and receiving new life in our spirits through trust in Jesus’ blood. I will also link you to a couple of Proclamation! articles that show how Adventism’s view of humanity is unbiblical. I hope these help; please feel free to email. https://www.youtube.com/live/wXDzu6hKJuQ?si=ZkLyaU7VKpvM9ygt
Jesus’ Two-Touch Healing
I have favorite stories in the Bible, and your Blind Man story that you discussed in your Proclamation! letters to the editor, is one of them. I know that I did not attend your conference, so I have no idea what was said concerning it. But in case you didn’t get into the ancient perspective of it, I thought that maybe I could share a little something with your readers that they might like.
The first time I heard this “blind story”, I wanted to know (and what most folks ask): “If the man was blind, then after the first healing, how does he know that what he sees are walking men? And how does he know what trees look like if he has always been blind? Something doesn’t add up…or does it?”
The Greek word for blind in Matt. 23 means opaque, as in cloudiness or smoky. So this blind man, it would seem, had not always been totally blind. At some point, he was able to see and know what men and trees looked like. (Adam Clark)
In ancient/Bible times, runny, gooey, weepy, red, and crusty eyes were a common malady. Symptoms ranged from an irritating film over the eyes to complete blindness. (This same malady can be found in third-world countries today.) In Ancient times, it occurred due to poor sanitation, poor hygiene, the spread of disease by flies, and immoral practices. Back then, there was no cure. Oil was used to clean and comfort, but it did not heal. Some people spent a significant part of their lives walking around, trying to see through the film that covered their eyes. When the crusting and sealing became too difficult and painful to handle, people would give up, leave their eyes sealed shut, and live a blind, often destitute, and hopeless life.
The story in Matthew says that Jesus washed the man’s eyes with spit. In the ancient world, this was a gentle and somewhat safe way to clean the eyes. It was better than ancient water, which often carried more disease.
Once Jesus washed (opened) the man’s eyes, He told the man to describe what he saw. But the man was still looking through the film that covered his eyes and still seeing things in the old, unclear way. (Partial blindness. Both literally and spiritually figurative.) Then Jesus performed the full healing. He gave the man clear new sight. (Literally and spiritually figurative.) The story might not seem like much to us with our modern antibiotics, but back then, having one’s eyes opened and healed was a deeply emotional, life-changing, and life-saving experience. Jesus didn’t just heal the man; He saved his life. (Literally and spiritually figurative.)
—VIA EMAIL
Response: Thank you for this historical background. Truly our Lord Jesus revealed Himself to be the Creator, the One who had authority to restore all creation. Thank you for helping us see the circumstances of this remarkable account. †
- In Adam or In Christ: Where Are You? - March 5, 2026
- March 7–13, 2026 - March 5, 2026
- We Got Mail - March 5, 2026