When I was growing up in a moderate, centrist church -- somewhere between mainline Christianity and evangelicalism -- Original Sin was a given. I first learned about it in youth group, and we regularly talked about it. Actually, it's more accurate to say that we talked about a life with Christ, and the notion of Original Sin was in the background. It was assumed. And I cannot remember that it was ever debated.In other words, I assumed that the doctrine of Original Sin was a biblical notion, and that all Christians accepted it as gospel truth. Of course, neither is true.
In college, Original Sin was also assumed by the Campus Crusaders and Navigators who ministered to me, as well as in the little bible church that I attended. In fact, here's a telling section from that church's current web page on doctrine:
Man was created in the image of God to enjoy friendship with Him ( Genesis 1:26). Man sinned and his fellowship with God was broken ( Genesis 3). Man is now deceitful and desperately wicked ( Jeremiah 17:9). He has the capacity for all sin and lives his life independent of his Creator. In his natural rebellious state, his destiny is to spend eternity totally separated from God in the lake of fire prepared for the devil and his angels ( II Thessalonians 1:8; Revelation 20:11-15). Man (Anthropology)
But, while in college, I also took at class on the theology of Augustine from an eccentric professor, Charles Stinson, and therein I learned that the great father of Western theology was the author of the doctrine of Original Sin. Of course, Augustine was not making it up ex novo, but was taking as his inspiration the account of creation in Genesis 3 and certain Pauline texts.
In seminary, I learned from John Thompson that John Calvin and his theological heirs reified the notion of Original Sin and that it hadn't played much of a role in medieval and Scholastic theology.
And sometime later, I discovered that whole branches of the Christian family tree -- most notably, the Orthodox Church -- has never embraced Original Sin.
I have come to reject the notion of Original Sin. I consider it neither biblically, philosophically, nor scientifically tenable. And I'm going to spend this week blogging about why I've rejected it. I look forward to hearing your thoughts...
(HT: Richard Beck for inspiring me.)
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
tony, you're starting to go too far with what you're believing in. and to say that it's absolutely true that original sin doesn't exist is in itself a fault on your own belief system. since the emergent church is supposed to stand by that absolutes cannot be made so easily. so in this case, you'd have to be open to the idea still to original sin. won't it be logically based that over thousands of years, original sin is still taught? can something like that what you may call 'heretical' have lasted all these years in Christianity? look at all the old teachings. the best scholars (yes, some even better than you guys) have stood by the doctrine of original sin.
did you even read your bible? original sin can be found in a lot of passages. in adam all die, in Christ there is life.
you're dabbling on pelagianism, and that was already ruled out as heresy long ago.
Tony J.,
Romans 5: 12, 14 convict you of your apostasy...that is, if you were really one of us.
By trying to re write Holy Writ to fit your own passion and desire of not answering for your sin to a holy God, you have detracted from the Word of God and for that you are under a curse. You need to repent and believe the Gospel and contend for the faith (Jude).
Your man made philosophy will not serve you at the day of judgment.
Your will stand on your own and the Word of God convicts you or rejecting the final and finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross wherein he died for the sins of the world.
Yes Tony, there is original sin and you are a sinner in need of salvation. Your good works just won't cut it.
Hello SIR,
I want to share my view of original sin as I interpret the bible. Original Sin is real, it exist, but not in the way that most people think it does. Original sin is merely the first sin ever committed, that is, by Adam and his lovely wife Eve, in the garden of Eden. And that's all it means. Due to that sin, certain effects or consequences take place, such as pain during child labor and working the fields for food. Humans are born into the effects of that sin, NOT THE SIN ITSELF. Allow me to make an analogy. Let's suppose for a moment that a woman has promiscuos sex with a man who turns out to have AIDS. In turn the woman becomes infected also. She finds out later that she is also pregnant. Now when the baby is born, it too has AIDS. The sin of the woman is fornication, the effect of that sin is AIDS. So her baby isn't born with her sin but the effect of her sin. That is what happens with original sin. We are NOT born with the sin itself rather its effect (a likelihood and propensity to sin). In other words, I am stating that humans are in fact born sinless but due to the extreme sinful conditions into which we are born, the likelihood that we will sin becomes insurmountable and we sin.
Secondly, how can anyone who believes that almighty GOD who is all-loving, all-merciful and all-just could imput the sin of one person onto another person who had nothing to do with it. It is like my brother robbing and bank and the police arresting and encarcerating his entire family and finding them guilty of bank robbery. That is the exact thing that is occurring when we say the GOD does that. Does that seem like a fair, just and loving GOD.
honestly, the idea of original sin goes against many biblical ideas, and it seems like the idea that only Christ (and not the Father) forgives was added as an afterthought to keep the sheep from questioning why Adam wasn't just forgiven instead of being eternally tortured just for eating an apple.
furthermore, since Adam tried to do what he perceived as "right" (by clothing himself) when he had the knowledge of both good AND evil seems to devalue the argument that mankind is inherently evil. also, since he didn't have this knowledge BEFORE he ate the apple, how could he have known it was wrong, just because God "warned" him about it?
the Catholic church (which pretty much owned the Bible racket for countless centuries) has committed numerous heretical atrocities in their own right, including "editing the word of God" numerous times... how does any man see himself as fit to EDIT the word of God? who knows what was added into the scripture purely for deception?
This doctrine of original sin is completely unknown as a Jewish doctrine, not one of the Jewish systems -- orthodox, coservative, liberal or whatever holds to this system. In fact, there is no reference to it even in the dead sea scrolls. Without the doctrine of original sin, the mary hearsays all fall flat because there is no need for a sinless mary demon, nor a need for an ever virgin. One need only read Eze 18 to see that biblically speaking the doctrine of original sin is biblically impossible.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.