IS SINFUL NATURE A FAIR TRANSLATION OF FLESH?
The NIV inconsistently translates things like “flesh” and “carnal mind” as “sinful nature,” but NOT when it says that God was manifest in the flesh, or if you deny that Jesus came in the flesh you are antiChrist. Why not be consistent and say God was manifest in the “sinful nature” and if you deny that Jesus Christ came in the “sinful nature” you are an antiChrist?
They are conveniently inconsistent in their translation. The fact is, it was the Gnostics who taught that the flesh was in and of itself sinful and that is why they denied Jesus came in the flesh.
Imagine if we translated a Bible so that those passages that speak of the “heart” we translate as “free will.”
“A good man out of the good treasure of his free will bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his free will bringeth forth evil things.” Mat 12:35
The Calvinists would be upset. Because that is an interpretation, not a translation.
Same with the NIV. Sinful nature is an interpretation of flesh, not a translation.
GET A FREE E-BOOK
Does Man Inherit A Sinful Nature by Jesse Morrell is a thorough examination and refutation to one of the oldest theological excuses for sin – a sinful nature. With an abundance of scripture, keen logic, and an appeal to Christian teachers throughout history, this book not only shows that men are not born with a sinful nature but that sin is actually contrary to the nature God gave us. It is 211 pages.
You can request a free e-version of this book by signing up to our email newsletter!