Theology Thursday: Original Guilt or Original Sin?
I love coming back to the beginning of a Bible read-through. There’s something comforting in reading Genesis again. Of course, that comfort usually wears off about the time I get into Exodus. But I still revel in the beginning.
I’ve thought a lot about Origins in the last few years, and at this point I’m decidedly undecided on what to make of Genesis 1-3. I’m definitely not a Young-Earth Creationist, but I’m not ready to throw Adam and Eve out, either.
I’m planning on doing a post on Origins at some point, but I’m not ready for it yet. If I run short of topics, I’ll double back and hit it later. Or I’ll wait until next year. That’s the kind of priority I put on the topic.
As I said (well, wrote), I’m not ready to throw Adam and Eve out, because I still have to deal with The Fall. It’s a topic I haven’t studied as much as I need to, and at some point I want to read Bonhoeffer’s Creation and Fall.
But what I do understand is this: something happened. I know. Profound, right?
Now, some people want to say that Adam’s sin is somehow inherited by all his progeny, and not in some vague spiritual way, but as a stain on the soul that makes even a newborn ineligible for Heaven. I reject this idea.
I also reject the idea that, somehow, Adam’s sin explains our tendency to sin. And I think I can explain why I reject it.
Quick, off the top of your head, come up with two names of people in the Bible who didn’t have a fallen nature. (Old Testament only, please. And I’m not sure Jesus would be a correct answer anyway. I know this gets me into trouble at times, but I believe He was like us. But come back next week for more on that topic.)
Did you come up with the names? Or were you distracted by my little parenthetical (and inflammatory) statement? The two names I was looking for were:
Adam and Eve!!!
Yes, here we have an example of two people who were born without any stain of Original Sin on them. And how did they fare? You got it. They still sinned. They didn’t need a Fallen Nature to make them fall. So Original Sin certainly isn’t a good explanation for Why We Sin.
I’m not any closer to understanding our sinful natures, because without recourse to Original Sin, there’s a disturbing possibility: God created us with the tendency toward sin and then expected us to battle that tendency. Or He just created in us the ability to choose and didn’t tip the scales toward obedience or disobedience and we all get to choose (seems to fit with Romans 5:12). It’s an interesting brain-burner anyway.
So when it really comes down to it, I don’t have a problem with the doctrine of Original Sin, even if I don’t understand it, so much as the doctrine of Original Guilt. Yes, our First Parents sinned. Yes, we all sin. But we bear the burden of our sins, and not the sins of our parents. And I think the weight of Scripture is on my side here, what with all the insistence that children will not be punished for their parents’ sins. (And no, I don’t think Exodus 20:5 proves me wrong here.)
Thoughts? Original Sin or Original Guilt? Are we born stained? I’m happy to be corrected here.
January 17th, 2010 - 21:03
You know, that is a good question, and one I have not really considered thoughtfully, but just accepted as part of Christian doctrine. I never look at Adam and Eve that way before – no fallen nature, yet they sinned anyway. So if they sinned with a “clean” birth, what does that mean for us?
I’ve always been uncomfortable with the idea that we pay for the sins of our ancestors, and not only for our own sin.
I know that Eastern Orthodox Christians have a different view of Original Sin than the West, though I can’t think of it at the moment. Have you looked into their views at all?
January 17th, 2010 - 22:39
I admit that I’m woefully ignorant of Eastern Orthodox views. I think that’s going to have to be my next area of study.
January 18th, 2010 - 10:48
Yes, EO have a different view of our fallen nature. We don’t believe in inherited guilt but we inherit the result of Adam’s sin (death). We do reject the total depravity of man doctrine because we believe that all men carry the Divine Light of the Creator (we were made in His image and that has not been lost) – it’s just in some people it is more hidden than others.
It would be best to consult those much more up on their theology in this area than myself. I’m more of a history and practice of the early church person…and even then I’m woefully inadequate.
Romanides’ “Ancestral Sin” is often recommended for this subject. I personally found it to be quite dense. The best thing to do is make an appt. with a priest and discuss.
January 18th, 2010 - 13:38
I was hoping you’d chime in here. I may just have to talk to a priest sometime, though there’s a Bible forum a fairly knowledgeable EO posts on. Maybe I’ll hit him up first.
January 18th, 2010 - 16:42
Well, if you ever want my opinion, just drop me an email.
January 23rd, 2010 - 12:45
The Presbyterian belief, as taught to me by my pastor, goes something like this:
Before the fall, Adam and Eve were perfect, but able to sin should they ever decide to do so. After the fall, they couldn’t go back to the state of innocence they had before they knew intimately what sin was. They tried to pretend they hadn’t sinned, but they had, and they passed that knowledge on to their children. They couldn’t NOT pass it on, because it was such a radical event in their lives.
After the fall, we are now incapable of really doing right unless we are made able by God. We can do “good” things, but our motivations won’t be correct because we aren’t in communication with God.
In the new Heaven and new Earth, we will be perfect again and unable to sin, a state which humans have never experienced before. This might be through some sort of process we go through first, or by the sheer proximity to God, or by virtue of the fact that there will no longer be any negative influences.
I’d never claim that was total and absolute truth of course, but it makes sense to me in general terms and it might be helpful.
January 23rd, 2010 - 18:33
That sounds very Presbyteriany.
I jest because I also attend a Presbyterian Church. I definitely like the first paragraph as an explanation of the effect of The Fall, but I don’t totally track with the Total Depravity direction after it.
January 23rd, 2010 - 18:42
I actually noticed the same thing as I was typing it up.
I’ll hopefully remember to ask my pastor about it tomorrow. I don’t know if I’ve forgotten the train of thought or if I never made a connection there in the first place.
January 23rd, 2010 - 18:43
Of course as soon as I hit the button I remembered a bit of it… I’m thinking it was something to do with the original sin damaging communication with God. He didn’t come to Earth directly any more, something like that…