What is the Orthodox Perspective on Original Sin? 

" im begining to see the light". here here. got onto this from david bently Hart brilliant guy. perhaos my initial suspision and hostility to us inheriting o.s. was correct. So that devil Augustine started it eh? Amazing. Im begining to understand too all the theological baggage we in the west inherited over the centurys. Great too in that hell looks like its lost some of its steam.Only half the reason now it seems. It does cheapen the sacrifice though, does it not? Christ died for A and Eves o.s. All the airs gone out of the ballon hasnt it? Gotta xheck out E O some more. And Ithought they were were just Catholic clones. peace brother.

me too...

Me too

@@chriswest6652 Saint Augustine isn't a devil he is a Saint. Saint's can have errors and still be saints he did a lot to combat many types of heresies. Also Augustines later writings were much more cohesive. So many people just take snippets of Augustine ignoring the whole. :) hope that helps.

I have the same experience. I was born a Buddhist and until I discovered Orthodoxy I never understood Christianity and I was practically anti Christian because it seemed so strange and neither Roman Catholicism nor various Protestant denominations held the answers I sought but now I am proudly an Orthodox Christian.

Based.

Based

Based and red pilled

B-b-b-b-BASED

Baste

You don't know what that means to us. Glory to God for all things.

@@Trisagionfilms Thank you for this, I'm amidst graduate studies from a Catholic University presently studying the notion of original sin and this video highlights issues that I find problematic from the Catholic teaching on original sin. However, could someone please explain - as there does indeed seem to be support from the Fathers, both Eastern & Western, as well as, Sacred Scripture, for the Immaculate Conception (the terminology in the East being different, but the meaning?) - how is Orthodox teaching contrary to Catholic teaching on the Immaculate Conception? It seems that objections to Roman Catholic theology on original sin from the Orthodox perspective on ancestral sin might offer a correction & clarification. But I'm not at all convinced that the Dogma on the Immaculate Conception is an innovation as it seems to be clearly a part of the Liturgical, Scriptural and Eastern & Western teaching from the Fathers, i.e. the Immaculate Conception is a teaching deeply rooted in Tradition - Revelation from God. Please advise your thoughts on this issue as I'm confident in our mutual love (that comes from God Himself) for the Theotokos!

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-3OpnLRTD9nE.html This will help you immensely I think.

@@MPFXT I would be happy to have this conversation with you. Would you please give the verse that you believe supports immaculate, conception? As stated, in the video when one has a clear understanding of sin, the necessity of an immaculate, conception becomes moot. I do not mean to insult your intelligence, nor do I feel that I am in any way qualified, but I continue to be happy to exchange thoughts with you.

The Immaculate Connception is not dependent on a particular definition of sin. Nor is it defined to be necessary because of the need to isolate the Savior from the taint of original sin. Rather it is fitting. You see, original sin is the loss of original grace. Adam and Eve lost this original grace and communion with God. And since you cannot give what you don’t have, they can not give it to their descendants. But God does restore us to grace through the sacraments. God wanted to have an immaculate mother, not because it was necessary to keep Jesus from being infected by original sin, but because it was appropriate that the Mother of God and mother of the church would be from the first moment of her existence in the closest union and theosis with God and so that she who is the terror of demons would never for one instant be under the dominion of the evil one. Therefore, as Gregory Palamas explained, Mary we “pre-purified” and thus fully pure, sinless, and immaculate from the first moment of her existence, never having experienced any of the effects of original sin, mainly the deprivation of original grace, which she was full of from her beginning. Nothing heterodox about that!

Glad you enjoyed!

AMHN

Augustine's problem was he had been a Manichaean Gnostic prior to converting to Christianity. He never gave up all of his Gnosticism unfortunately.

Original Sin doesn't apply to everyone in all circumstances.

I need help to see the truth of this

Do you have to teach a child to steal, lie or be selfish?

@@franciscafazzo3460 the way I see it is that, once sin was introduced into the world mankind would never be the same, and we have trouble resisting our base passions (the 7 deadly sins) and are more susceptible to temptations. When we sin we only add to more distraction in the world.

@@jd3jefferson556 Your last line is so deep! I am sometimes wondering if what we do bad (even the smallest things) reverberate somehow and add to the "entropy" of our world. I would think so, otherwise we wouldn't have the notions of "cursed place" or "holy place". What we do - good or bad - adds up and influences the "quality" of the whole.

Thank you!

Why then do Adam's sons and daughters die ? When your mother brought you to this world, she did it probably with a great deal of pain... Did she eat too of the forbidden fruit ? Do you believe that God punished your mother for eating a fruit she never did eat, or should we understand that all humanity was condemned in the garden of Eden ?

@@johnstanp9692 you may not be guilty but you can suffer the consequences

@@johnstanp9692 Interestingly, I've read that the Orthodox belief is that God allowed men to die so we would not permanently be condemned like the fallen angels. Adam and Eve experienced soul death upon sinning, but God transformed their bodies from glowing, radiant bodies into more animalistic bodies that procreated as animals did. Previously, they were more like the angels and looked like Christ's transfigured body on Mt. Tabor. Not allowing them to eat from the tree of life and stationing the angel there to guard paradise actually saved them and their offspring from permanent condemnation. I believe Father Seraphim Rose wrote a book about it. I'm an Inquirer into Orthodoxy, and not an expert by any means. Orthodoxy wades deep into waters I have never dreamed of previously. Blessings!

@@johnstanp9692 All humanity was condemned in the Garden of Eden we die and go back to the earth because of the disobedience of Adam and Eva. We are not fully saved until end of time the Consumation of the world. The soul rejoins the resurrected body. Baptism cleanses us of Original sin. Three types of sin Original, Venial and Mortal.

You’re only on the Eastern Orthodox side because you hate Román Catholics. But they condemn all of your teachings.

Roman Catholicism is the fly in the ointment not the Orthodox Church. They caused the division by breaking of the ten commandments that says "thou shall not bear false witness" look back to pre 11th century Christianity.

@@paulathomas.graham7693 updating a creed is not false-witness- if this were the case, the Nicene Creed *you* recite would be a false witness, as it was originally formulated in 325 and the version you profess was updated in 381. To this, you reply, that one was updated in a council of Bishops and the other by the Roman Patriarch acting alone. Fine, let this be as you say, then the question is the authority of the Roman patriarch, not this nonsense about violating commandments.

@@zayan6284 RCs didn’t simply “update” the creed. They modified its entire theology which was strictly forbidden.

Your exchange here makes me want to be neither RC or EO. But I do not hate either. Thank you to the makers of this video to aid my learning 🙏 May the schisms of the church be healed and heresies rooted out and love for God and neighbor prevail.

St. Augustine is a great Saint in Orthodoxy, but he wasn't infallible.

Come back to the Catholic Church! The Filioque isn't a heresy. The western bishops had widespread heresies that needed to be addressed directly. We should have convened another council. That being said, didn't Jesus breathe on his Apostles and say "receive the Holy Spirit " didn't the Holy Spirit literally flow from the Son?

"Venerable" or "Blessed" Augustine is celebrated in the Christian Orthodox calender among the other saints and martyrs. Before his death he asked for forgiveness for any errors in his views. I understand that his view on the Original Sin was the main one that deviated from Orthodoxy, or even the only one.

Thank God

We are open to all topics. We require community support to help us produce them.

@@Trisagionfilms I am searching for God. I am scientific. How do I know he truly excists? I feel empty.

A Geurse, If you would like to write to us via e-mail please write to trisagionproductions@gmail.com. We will pass it on to Fr. Panayiotis so that you can converse with him.

@@AG-wb3db I hope you found him in the meanwhile, if you are still searching or even gave up, please get in touch with me I also started looking later in life and found him although I am still getting to know Him, I will be happy to speak to you, if you reply Ill share my email with you, God bless you 🙏

I think ur on to something here!

You are most welcome friend! please share our content so we can grow the community and spread the word!

You only agree with the East because you hate Catholicism. But the East condemns your teachings too.

@@user-ty8zm3zk3x I think you missed the "on this" part.

@@user-ty8zm3zk3x Evengelicals live rent free in yo head huh? Lol

Roman Catholicism teaches Baptism takes away original sin. God did condemn the world . Unless you are baptised of water and the Holy Ghost you cannot enter heaven.

@Janette @Acts As (gratefully) Orthodox, I have a problem with "we are punished for our sins" and "condemn the world" in your messages around this... I would kindly replace them with John 3:16. Sins are just that we are missing targets and smash the walls like kids or sick/ill people. We should heal and grow. I know Someone Who an help with Grace. Put a step at a time in right direction and fall in His hands not aside.

The Roman Church changes its doctrine like the weather.

@@rob5462 😂😂😂

Bergoglio is a heretic, he gives Pelosi communion and restrict sacred liturgy, how to agree with Orthodox Church when Catholics can’t behold moral values?

We will get back to you friend :)

@@Trisagionfilms Still waiting

@Diego M @crobbie1984 I suggest emailing us at trisagionproductions@gmail.com

You look at this from an un-Orthodox perspective. The Orthodox understanding is at a different level. St Gregory of Nyssa in his "Soul and its Resurrection" says that a human in the image of God has no mouth or organs or a need to survive and nourish themselves with food. The distinction has nothing to do with before and after, it is more about two different concepts, two different viewpoints. What may seem important to a human, food or death, are the cause of sin. The Church produced the New Testament, it did not find it on a hotel desk. It is read extensively in services and its understanding and that of the Old Testament comes with extensive study and hearing it at the liturgy. The Gideon Bible that you may find in American hotels, which is the main contact of some Americans with Christianity, instead of starting with what the Church wrote, the Four Gospels, starts with the 1st chapter of Genesis on the first page. You have to spend days reading in the hotel before you get to the Four Gospels. In addition, you read the Gideon Bible outside the body of the Church, as if it were a novel or a coffee table book, out of context or Christian tradition. Many Americans read that first page as if it is the most important thing about Christianity because it is placed right at the front, and seem to read it as someone who is just learning to read, and has not read anything else ever before and has no contact with the traditions and understanding of the Church.

This is a good recent development and correction on the part of the Roman Catholic Church. The reference in this video is about the historical events which had affected the Roman Catholic Church and her teachings. We are glad to hear that this has been corrected.

You must not know how much Catholic theology is based off the early understanding of original sin. It’s a rabbit hole.

@@Trisagionfilms the "Old" Catechism says the same thing, though in different words. Why can our Orthodox brothers accept that humanity inherits the physical consequences of Adam's sin (death and suffering) but not the stain of his sin which deprive all humans of natural sanctity and justice? Thank you!

By the way, this is what the "Old" Catechism says on original sin and Baptism: "35 Q. In what state did God place our first parents, Adam and Eve? A. God placed our first parents, Adam and Eve, in the state of innocence and grace; but they soon fell away by sin. 36 Q. Besides innocence and sanctifying grace did God confer any other gifts on our first parents? A. Besides innocence and sanctifying grace, God conferred on our first parents other gifts, which, along with sanctifying . grace, they were to transmit to their descendants; these were: (1) Integrity, that is, the perfect subjection of sense . reason; (2) Immortality; (3) Immunity from all pain and sorrow; (4) A knowledge in keeping with their state. 37 Q. What was the nature of Adam's sin? A. Adam's sin was a sin of pride and of grave disobedience. 38 Q. What chastisement was meted out to the sin of Adam and Eve? A. Adam and Eve lost the grace of God and the right they had to Heaven; they were driven out of the earthly Paradise, subjected to many miseries of soul and body, and condemned to death. 39 Q. If Adam and Eve had not sinned, would they have bee exempt from death? A. If Adam and Eve had not sinned and if they had remained faithful to God, they would, after a happy and tranquil sojourn here on earth, and without dying, have been transferred by God into Heaven, to enjoy a life of unending glory. 40 Q. Were these gifts due to man? A. These gifts were in no way due to man, but were absolutely gratuitous and supernatural; and hence, when Adam disobeyed the divine command, God could without any injustice deprive both Adam and his posterity of them. 41 Q. Is this sin proper to Adam alone? A. This sin is not Adam's sin alone, but it is also our sin, though in a different sense. It is Adam's sin because he committed it by an act of his will, and hence in him it was a personal sin. It is our sin also because Adam, having committed it in his capacity as the head and source of the human race, it was transmitted by natural generation to all his descendants: and hence in us it is original sin. 42 Q. How is it possible for original sin to be transmitted to all men? A. Original sin is transmitted to all men because God, having conferred sanctifying grace and other supernatural gifts on the human race in Adam, on the condition that Adam should not disobey Him; and Adam having disobeyed, as head and father of the human race, rendered human nature rebellious against God. And hence, human nature is transmitted to all the descendants of Adam in a state of rebellion against God, and deprived of divine grace and other gifts. 43 Q. Do all men contract original sin? A. Yes, all men contract original sin, with the exception of the Blessed Virgin, who was preserved from it by a singular privilege of God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ our Saviour. 44 Q. Could not men be saved after Adam's sin? A. After Adam's sin men could not be saved, if God had not shown mercy towards them. 45 Q. What was the mercy shown by God to the human race? A. The mercy shown by God to the human race was that of immediately promising Adam a divine Redeemer or Messiah, and of sending this Messiah in His own good time to free men from the slavery of sin and of the devil." 1 Q. What is the sacrament of Baptism? A. Baptism is a sacrament by which we are born again to the grace of God, and become Christians. 2 Q. What are the effects of the sacrament of Baptism? A. The sacrament of Baptism confers first sanctifying grace by which original sin is washed away, as well as all actual sin if any such exists; it remits all punishment due on account of such sins; it imprints the character of a Christian; it makes us children of God, members of the Church, and heirs to Paradise, and enables us to receive the other sacraments.

Makes so much more sense. Well said!

I don't think so, we will all die because of the sin of adam, but are not guilty because of adams sin

@@IOwnedCamo We inherited a "weak will," not his very sin. You are right!!

@@IOwnedCamo In using the language of "Guilt of original sin" The Catholic Church simply means that it is through Adams sin that the consequences of sin are brought upon all. So in a sense, though we are not personally "Guilty" of his sin we beat the guilt in that we suffer the consequences with him. It is not to say that we are guilty of Adams sin or bear personal guilt.

@@aubreygmcghee are u sure about that

Because Adam, we has the imperfection of nature to sin, but death is already a punishment from Adam. Our actions are our choice, we take responsibility on our actions.

Excellent question. We will all be tempted to sin and fall into sin at some point in our lives. Yet, Christ stills forgives us. So baptism would be a forgiveness of inevitable sin done by our own actions. That is different from assuming we are automatically guilty of Adams sin at birth; we suffer the consequences of death because of his sin, but are only guilty of our sin.

Nicole Hendrix I was reading a book by Scott Hahn, and he said that from the Catholic perspective, we’re born deprived of everlasting life, but we’re not depraved by any means. And I think we would agree on the concupiscence (inclination to sin) because of the fall of Adam and Eve.

Nicole Hendrix but we’re not forgiven for inevitable sins. That’s why we go to Confession.

our own sins, not Adam's

@@nicolehendrix5632 if the sin is inevitable how is that any different from the curse of having an original sin? I believe it boils down to language and how Latin and Greek differ slightly in translation. The effect of being caused to sin must have an origin, the western church has rationalized this as the cost of being granted free-will, the freedom to choose to be bad because without the choice there is no freedom.

Trisagion Films can you produce a video on the Orthodox view of election/predestination with this Fr. teaching! He has a way of explaining large theological concepts well from a historical perspective .

I'm orthodox, but doesn't this video contradict with the creed, where we say that we believe in one baptism for the remission of sins.

Could you elaborate on this btw? I'm non denominational and looking into Eastern Orthodoxy but some things don't make sense to me. For example, I understand the belief of not being born into sin according to the doctrine of 'Original Sin' but verses like Psalm 51:5 clearly show being born into sin Psalm 51:5 NKJV "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me." God bless you, stay firm in Christ in these end times

@@SayanTheChristian I do understand your question and it has an interesting explanation. The first is from the Zondervan NRSV Cultural Study Bible , a reputable and reliable Christian publisher and with 2 acknowledged experts authors collating and writing the study notes, well worth buying btw, that explains that the mix of sources for the cultural basis of many of the Hebrew writings were heavily influenced by the contact with the surrounding Mesopotamian and Sumerian cultures that held that no human could ever be sinless simply due to our human nature. It is not based on any later notion of transmitted sin by hereditary means. The second is from the the most reputable English version of the Hebrew scriptures, The Jewish Study Bible, the TANAKH Translation from the Jewish Publication Society, after all , they are Hebrew writings, that clearly shows the original writings of Psalm51:5 (verse 7 in the Jewish numbering) is best translated from the original Hebrew as an expression of utter guilt for transgressions they have committed and in no way implies original sin. The NKJV has issues for accuracy of meaning and translation as it was was written somewhat as a political translation under some pressure from the reigning monarch of the time to add religious power to a dispute with Catholicism that was on-going and violent. The most accurate translation used by most scholars for accuracy is any NRSV version. Wonderful and thoughtful question. God Bless

​@@SayanTheChristianon a plain reading that Psalm seems to be saying that his mother fornicated while conceiving him and doesn't imply anything about the state of his soul.

I have done the work in my paper comparing the two fathers on the subject of original sin. Please write to me via e-mail at frpanayiotis@gmail.com and I will share the paper with you. It was published in SVTQ.(Fr. Panayiotis)

Well said!

We have to remember that the Psalms are poetry not technical theological writing. So when laid out with all other Scripture, it seems more harmonious to interpret that as a way of saying "I have been a sinner since the start." Which all Christians believe. We are bent toward sin from the beginning just not personally guilty for Adam's sin.

No it doesn't....from Ethiopian Orthodox church there is a teaching that David said this because of his mother or father....i think his mother gave birth to him because of lust or something like that. He is not mentioning the hereditary or orginal sin...i will ask someone and will tell u more about it

Me too

Bingo!! There's always a choice!! I can't ever blame on the al...al..alcohol!! Also, John 3:16-20. People actually choose hell. God doesn't arbitrarily send people there. Sheez. He pronounced all that was made in Genesis" Good,Very Good!" So even the Angles were Good until they "chose" evil. We inherit a weak will that chooses the latter unfortunately but not the guilt of Adam.

Again, my friend, you are right, that it is as if we all ate with Adam from the forbidden fruit, because we all inherited his fallen condition. The refined point in this conversation which we need to pay attention to carefully, is that, even though we inherited the fallen condition of Adam, we did not inherit his responsibility for what he did. We did not inherit his sin (the so called "Original Sin")! This is the great divide between the Eastern Fathers and what St. Augustine said, which affected the Western Church until today. In other words, a child born does not inherit the sin of Adam, even though he/she is born into the fallen condition which is the result of the sin of Adam. Hence, a child will not go to hell, if the child were to die before baptism, because the child has no sin accounted against it. This is made very clear by St. John Chrysostom. (Fr. Panayiotis Papageorgiou)

@@Trisagionfilms original sin is not guilt but the effects of the sin of adam. if it had guilt attached to it, it would be a personal sin like any other. this like many other issues which supposedly divide byzantines and roman catholics is an issue of semantics, not an actual disagreement.

Exactly right. Its a disagreement based on semantics. Even Eastern Theologians like St Gregory of Nazianzus in his treatise on baptism says one cant be saved without baptism (this is the citation used in the summa to defend limbo). Original sin is differentiated from actual sin precisely that there is no guilt on the part of the baby only the effect of the loss of communion with God, etc. Mary too would not have been conceived in communion with God except for by the special grace given to her.

Hey Robert, did you ever get the answer you were looking for?

Baptism is the admission into the Christian Church. Through the Christian Church one may be saved. I assume the meaning of baptism in the Catholic Church may be different. That one may not need to live as a Christian to be saved after admission into the Christian Church..

We are baptised to become members of the Orthodox church which - when you confess as a child or adult - a priest prays for you and your sins are forgiven - if you are sincere of course and do not go on to repeat your mistakes.

Thank you, shepherd Panayiotis. i studied this now.

Ex. 34:7 keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty, VISITING the iniquity of the fathers upon the children and the children’s children, to the third and the fourth generation.” This has been understood through the centuries and especially by the Church Fathers as saying that the consequences of the sins of the father VISIT the children and children’s children up to the third and fourth generation (not that the children and grandchildren are guilty of the sins of the father). Yes, the consequences of the sin of Adam have been passed on to all of us, like the tendency to sin and death, just like AIDS is passed on to the children of the parents that have it. No guilt is transmitted, though. Original sin as Augustine taught it and as the West inherited it teaches that everyone is born with the guilt of Adam and is condemned to hell unless they are baptized. This is not the Orthodox teaching. The Eastern Fathers taught that the consequences of the Fall are being inherited by everyone born (death, the inclination toward sin, the aggravation of the passions) because our nature has been affected, but we don not inherit the guilt of Adam. We are not responsible for the sin of Adam. We inherit Fallen nature but not guilt for the sin of Adam. (Fr. Panayiotis)

@@Trisagionfilms Thank you for explaining this. I really like the videos you put out. They are very edifying.

Generally, as ultimately demonic, it Sounds harsh, but that's the reality. However, I think most people living in India are not "demon-possessed," but the gurus and the ones that go very deep tend to deal with demonic forces. There is an excellent book written by a Greek man who was interested in eastern religions and black magic. It's about his experiences in India, with magic and with elder Paisios of Mt. Athos. It's called the Gurus the Young Man and Elder Paisios" I would highly recommend it.

True!

I am not sure how you mean. Original sin (as it is called in the west - known to us as ancestral sin), is the first transgression against God by Adam (and Eve) to eat from that which was forbidden by the Lord, plunging Adam and Eve out of heaven and into their journey towards death. Father is saying that we do not bear responsibility (guilt) for this (as is taught in the West following St. Augustine's teachings) but that we inherited death from Adam, followed by our sins, which we need to account for.

Yes. Read this article for more on this topic: www.pravmir.com/do-infants-go-to-hell-if-they-die-before-baptism-the-doctrine-of-original-sin-re-examined/

Mary was born in sin , jesus partook of our same flesh and blood. Adam was not cursed the ground was. Eve was not equal to the man,he would be her lord.

Jews don't believe in Christ so their theology has little to do with the Christian covenant. 1 Corinthians 15 is an illustration of the imputation of sin due to the law, and through Christ that imputation being removed. It has little to do with Adam beyond Adam being the first to be held accountable for sin. Because God is not partial, this law stood for all of mankind, to which all men sin, not because of Adam, but because there was a law that held them all accountable.

She lived in the fallen human condition, but she was the most worthy person in history before and after. God waited for a person like her to be born so that he could come into the world

@@Trisagionfilms Thank you for your reply :) I don't remember perfectly what I was implying, but I think what confused me is how this would only be a problem for Catholics. As far as I understand it, the whole idea of venerating Mary is sort of based on the idea that she is like the Ark of the Covenant, carrying God inside of her, and in order for this to make sense, she would have to be devoid of any sin. Therefore Catholics say that she was conceived without Original Sin. But you don't have to 'get rid of Original Sin' because you do not hold onto that idea to begin with. Still, since she is technically human, she would also be a sinner, which leads to the question of how she can be considered the 'New Ark of the Covenant'.. Sorry if that sounds confusing, it does to me as well. There was just something that did not add up while watching so I ended up asking this question.

@@Trisagionfilms That applies even with Molinism (A catholic soteriology, but it's used a lot in some protestants theology) if you think about it.

wdym? Sin is what causes us to die because we reject God when we sin. Right?

No, that follows Western Christian Doctrine. Watch Trisagion Films' "Theories of Western Atonement". It explains this.

God bless!

We will reply soon!

We are all born in the condition of the Fall, where our passions are aggravated, our will is inclined toward evil and we are distant from God. We are also going to die. All of these are consequences of the Fall of Adam and Eve.

Did Jesus die then to deliver us from the fallen state?

My friend, we have to apprehend that God was never our enemy! He is Love! We became His enemy because of our self-centered attitude towards Him! Our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God became one of us to heal our trauma(=our hostile tendency towards God-Love) by his sacrifice(=the ultimate offering of love) and He conquered death(=seperation from God-Life) by his death and since then He became our Resurrection!

Mortality

You will be anathema if you teach that heretical nonsense in our Church.

Faith alone doesn't mean works/behaviors are not required for salvation but is rather, referring to the fact that gentile converts to Christianity don't need to observe older Jewish laws like circumcision's in order to gain salvation. Protestants mis-interpret faith alone to mean "once saved, always saved" however this is not true at all and contradicts Pauls letter to the Corinthians in which he calls for church discipline due to sin and immorality spreading within it. This contradicts faith alone because you can say you believe in Jesus Christ but if you don't repent of your sins and continue to keep sinning then you will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.

Orthodox understanding of original sin is not the disobeying of Gods order or law or commandement but rather mans knowledge of living life outside of the communion of God, basically man exercising his free will to live as an autonomous individual. This is why evryone after adam bares original sin (we all have the knowledge of making this personal choice). This is why after adam disobeyed God (eating from the tree of knowledge) it was not a question of “why couldnt God simply forgive him?” but rather one of salvation. Once you understand mans condition of sin you then understand the need for salvation - salvation which only comes from the ressurection of Christ and through the grace of God. Check out chapter 7 “Man” from the book Elements of Faith by Christos Yannaras - he explains it best.

veilofreality We believe in what you could say is “a diamond in the rough.” Our souls are pure diamonds, that dwell in a fallen flesh. Our natures (i.e. our souls) are wholly good and pure, the incorruptible image of God. But our flesh is in the image of Adam, and because of Adam’s sin we are all susceptible to corrupting the flesh and we will all suffer death in the flesh. But, we do not believe that we are unable to fight such corruption. With the grace of God we can keep our flesh pure, just as, for example, the Blessed Virgin Mary did during her life. The best example of this can be seen in the words of St. Paul in Romans 7:22-23: “For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being [my soul], but I see in my members [my flesh] another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members.” Life, thus, is a constant struggle to choose God over Satan, to choose the Law of God over the law of sin.

men are free after the flood, it cleansed the dooming lineage of the past.

Georgios Papadopoulos where did you here this??? That makes so much sense.

Those are not old they are new to Orthodoxy during a time when western theology entered into the orthodox world. Watch this video: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MUtNg_qfRGo.html We discuss this topic here

Thanks, I will look.

The video is very interesting. It’s true the majority of references to the guilt from original sin comes in the ages 1600. But there are references too before, here two examples: Council of Carthage (419): Likewise it seemed good that whosoever denies that infants newly from their mother’s wombs should be baptized, or says that baptism is for remission of sins, but that they derive from Adam no original sin, which needs to be removed by the laver of regeneration, from whence the conclusion follows, that in them the form of baptism for the remission of sins, is to be understood as false and not true, let him be anathema. (Council of Carthage, canon 110) St. Symeon the Theologian (11th century): 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. (The Ancestral Sin and our Regeneration) Thanks for your attention

Theology isn't based around a couple of quotes and a misguided council. The Orthodox maintain the theology that is presented in this video.

I think its your computer. Seems like some people have a problem with it while others don't.