Original Sin
Posted: Thu 10 May 10 2012 11:46 pm
A question was asked about what I thought about the idea of original sin and I thought that maybe it might be good to approach this systematically, starting with a definition:-
Definition of Original Sin
Unsurprisingly, there are several variations of this doctrine but most of them would have some or all of the following basic idea:-
1. When Adam sinned, all his descendants (that would be all of us) inherited death
2. but not just death, our human nature also became corrupted by sin - fallen nature
3. leaving man incapable of moral goodness - total depravity
In this way, we are all tainted by Adam's "original sin" in that we suffer both death, as well as "total depravity. "This idea that our will became corrupt or tainted is technically known as "mediate imputation." Both these concepts are central to Calvinism and are not shared by Arminians.
The Westminster's longer cathechism defines original sin in this way:-
Original sin is the corruption of man's nature, whereby he is utterly indisposed, disabled and made opposite to all that is spiritually good, and wholly inclined to evil, and that continually.
The biblical support for these two ideas (fallen nature, and total depravity) are often drawn from:-
1. Gen 6:5, 8:21, Job 15:14,15, Ps 51:5, Jer 17:9, Isa 64:6
2. Rom 3:23, 8:7,8, 1Cor 2:14, Eph 2:1-3
There are also other similar verses. It is useful to notice that none (not even one) of these verses actually demonstrate where the bible teaches that:-
1. man's nature became "fallen"
2. and it was a direct consequence of Adam's sin
There is little argument that man has the capability and propensity to sin (known as "concupiscence"). What is sorely missing is biblical support for the basic premise itself. All the arguments that I have seen on this account have been extremely flimsy at best, and conjectures for the most part. We might want to ask, so how did this idea of "original sin" come about?
Origins of (the theory of) Original Sin
The originator of this idea is usually attributed to Augustine. Attributions to Irenaeus of Lyon is usually misplaced since he did not hold to the kind of theory put forth by Augustine. For this reason, it is probably better to focus on the Augustinian conception of this idea, its' causes and evolution.
It should be pointed out, at this point, that while many Christians think that original sin is a central tenet of Christian faith - this is not actually the case (unless you are a Calvinist.) There is considerable diversity of views on this matter and Augustine's earliest forms of the idea is almost universally rejected today.
Because the basic arguments against the Augustinian conception of original sin have been written about so widely, I have included some useful links that provide the gist of the arguments. My personal position with respect to this can be summarized as follows:-
1. The federal theory to explain Romans 5
2. The full free-will (no special corruption of nature) of man (Arminian, somewhat semi-Pelagian)
References
http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=227
http://www.reformedreflections.ca/artic ... 6)%20.html
http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=eUV ... us&f=false
http://archive.catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9201frs.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_ ... iginal_sin
http://oca.org/questions/teaching/st.-a ... iginal-sin
http://www.leaderu.com/theology/augpelagius.html
Definition of Original Sin
Unsurprisingly, there are several variations of this doctrine but most of them would have some or all of the following basic idea:-
1. When Adam sinned, all his descendants (that would be all of us) inherited death
2. but not just death, our human nature also became corrupted by sin - fallen nature
3. leaving man incapable of moral goodness - total depravity
In this way, we are all tainted by Adam's "original sin" in that we suffer both death, as well as "total depravity. "This idea that our will became corrupt or tainted is technically known as "mediate imputation." Both these concepts are central to Calvinism and are not shared by Arminians.
The Westminster's longer cathechism defines original sin in this way:-
Original sin is the corruption of man's nature, whereby he is utterly indisposed, disabled and made opposite to all that is spiritually good, and wholly inclined to evil, and that continually.
The biblical support for these two ideas (fallen nature, and total depravity) are often drawn from:-
1. Gen 6:5, 8:21, Job 15:14,15, Ps 51:5, Jer 17:9, Isa 64:6
2. Rom 3:23, 8:7,8, 1Cor 2:14, Eph 2:1-3
There are also other similar verses. It is useful to notice that none (not even one) of these verses actually demonstrate where the bible teaches that:-
1. man's nature became "fallen"
2. and it was a direct consequence of Adam's sin
There is little argument that man has the capability and propensity to sin (known as "concupiscence"). What is sorely missing is biblical support for the basic premise itself. All the arguments that I have seen on this account have been extremely flimsy at best, and conjectures for the most part. We might want to ask, so how did this idea of "original sin" come about?
Origins of (the theory of) Original Sin
The originator of this idea is usually attributed to Augustine. Attributions to Irenaeus of Lyon is usually misplaced since he did not hold to the kind of theory put forth by Augustine. For this reason, it is probably better to focus on the Augustinian conception of this idea, its' causes and evolution.
It should be pointed out, at this point, that while many Christians think that original sin is a central tenet of Christian faith - this is not actually the case (unless you are a Calvinist.) There is considerable diversity of views on this matter and Augustine's earliest forms of the idea is almost universally rejected today.
Because the basic arguments against the Augustinian conception of original sin have been written about so widely, I have included some useful links that provide the gist of the arguments. My personal position with respect to this can be summarized as follows:-
1. The federal theory to explain Romans 5
2. The full free-will (no special corruption of nature) of man (Arminian, somewhat semi-Pelagian)
References
http://www.vision.org/visionmedia/article.aspx?id=227
http://www.reformedreflections.ca/artic ... 6)%20.html
http://books.google.com.sg/books?id=eUV ... us&f=false
http://archive.catholic.com/thisrock/1992/9201frs.asp
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_ ... iginal_sin
http://oca.org/questions/teaching/st.-a ... iginal-sin
http://www.leaderu.com/theology/augpelagius.html