Author: Gary Witcher

Original Sin

	Most Americans now own home computers.  One program that was included with many computers a few years ago was an encyclopedia called "Encarta."  This work is definitely not an authority on Scriptural matters.  In fact, nothing outside of the Bible can claim to be such an authority.  But "Encarta" does have an interesting and accurate entry concerning original sin.  It notes that the term "original sin" is not found in the Bible.  It mentions that some theologians claim that certain passages strongly imply the concept.  The Scriptures listed are Luke 11:13, 1 John 5:19 and Romans chapter 7.
	"If you then," Jesus teaches in Luke 11:13, "being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more shall {your} heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?"
	The Lord is speaking to adults.  He is contrasting God's goodness with that of man.  This passage is a poor reason to believe in the universal sinfulness of the human race.
	"We know that we are of God," 1 John 5:19 states, "and the whole world lies in {the power of} the evil one."
	What is John teaching here?  Is he claiming the universal sinfulness of man, or is he stating that the sinful things of the world lie within the dominion of Satan?  Why don't we ask John.
	"Do not love the world," we read in 1 John 2:15-17, "nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.  For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world.  And the world is passing away, and {also} its lusts; but the one who does the will of God abides forever."
	This passage describes the things of the world as involving lust and pride.  These are conscious activities that could hardly be extended to newborn infants.
	"For we know that the Law is spiritual," Paul observes in Romans 7:14-15, "but I am of flesh, sold into bondage to sin.  For that which I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I {would} like to {do,} but I am doing the very thing I hate."
	Paul's discussion in this chapter centers on the inability of the Old Law to free him from sin.
	"What shall we say then?" Paul has already noted in verses 7-8.  "Is the Law sin? May it never be! On the contrary, I would not have come to know sin except through the Law; for I would not have known about coveting if the Law had not said, 'You shall not covet.'  But sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, produced in me coveting of every kind; for apart from the Law sin {is} dead."
	Notice once again that the reference is to a conscious action.  Paul says that awareness of the commandment produced a certain result.  There is no defense here for a doctrine of universal sinfulness encompassing children.  Personally, I would hesitate to mention Romans chapter seven in an attempt to defend original sin, for this passage is one of the most powerful in refuting this idea.
	"And I was once alive apart from the Law," Paul explains in Romans 7:9-11, "but when the commandment came, sin became alive, and I died; and this commandment, which was to result in life, proved to result in death for me; for sin, taking opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through it killed me."
	When was Paul alive apart from the Law?  The only logical answer is that he was alive before he was old enough to be responsible to the commandments of the Law.  Once he became old enough to disobey the Law, however, sin deceived him and entered with spiritual death.  The clear teaching is that Paul had no sin when he was child.
	Tertullian, a second-century theologian, actually coined the phrase "original sin."  It did not achieve much prominence, though, until the work of Augustine in the late 4th and early 5th centuries.  This theologian developed his ideas in opposition to the thoughts of teachers such as Pelagius.  It is interesting to note that it was with great difficulty that the teachings of Pelagius were rejected in favor of those of Augustine.  One Pope condemned Pelagius, but this pope was soon followed by another who sided with these teachings.  Two synods acquitted Pelagius of heresy, but a council at Carthage finally found him guilty.
	It is in this setting that Augustine formalized the concept of original sin.  As the "Encarta" correctly notes, "In his elaboration of this doctrine, however, Augustine imported an idea foreign to the Bible: the notion that the taint of sin is transmitted from generation to generation by the act of procreation."
	Pelagius is not entirely correct in his doctrinal ideas, either.  But he is exactly right in his eloquent summation of sin.
	"Everything good and everything evil," he states, "in respect of which we are either worthy of praise or of blame, is done by us, not born with us."

	The debate about original sin continued to rage long after the deaths of Augustine and Pelagius.  Medieval theologians wrestled with it, as did Protestant leaders such as Martin Luther and John Calvin.  Even today it is generally tied to other doctrines in a way that makes it difficult for the leaders of the groups to give it up.  
	In Protestant theology, original sin is inseparably associated with the concepts of total depravity, unconditional predestination, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints.  If one falls, they all go.  So these groups are forced to support the idea that children are born in sin.
	Original sin is an integral part of Catholic theology, and it in turn has required the acquisition of other ideas.  For example, if original sin exists, then children who die before baptism are lost.  This has lead to the invention, with the help of Dante, of a place known as limbo.  These children cannot go to God with the stain of original sin, but hell seems too cruel a punishment.  So limbo is proposed as a place of bliss. Catholic theologians admit that such a place does not exist, but it remains in their practice as a necessary companion of original sin.  
	In the first half of the twelfth century, Pierre de Bruys and his associates were burned at the stake as heretics.  Among Pierre's teaching was the idea that infants must not be baptized, since infants are not capable of faith and cannot benefit vicariously from the faith of others.
	"Truly I say to you," the Lord instructs in Matthew 18:3, "unless you are converted and become like children, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven."
	To understand sin, we must understand what happened in the Garden of Eden.  Before Adam and Eve disobeyed God, there was no sin and there was no death.  Their disobedience opened the door for sin to enter the world.  With it came physical and spiritual death.  Physical suffering and death are the result of sharing a world with sin.  Spiritual death is the result of individual disobedience.
	"Therefore," Paul notes in Romans 5:12, "just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned."
	At first glance, though, it might appear that the Old Law supports the concept of sins being passed on to descendants.
	"You shall not worship them or serve them," God commands in Exodus 20:5-6, "for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments."
	If this is support for God condemning children for the sins of their parents, then it is also support for the idea that God transmits righteousness from one generation to another.    What God is saying, though, is that the children of the Israelites will bear the consequence of their parents' disobedience.  But each individual will answer for his or her own sins. 
	"Who showest lovingkindness to thousands," Jeremiah 32:18-19 says of God, "but repayest the iniquity of fathers into the bosom of their children after them, O great and mighty God. The Lord of hosts is His name; great in counsel and mighty in deed, whose eyes are open to all the ways of the sons of men, giving to everyone according to his ways and according to the fruit of his deeds."
	"Our fathers sinned, {and} are no more," we read in Lamentations 5:7, "it is we who have borne their iniquities."
	God had a special purpose for the Israelites.  So, while every individual remained personally responsible to God, the disobedience of the parents resulted in consequences that affected their children for several generations.  This purpose no longer exists.
	"In those days," Jeremiah 31:29-30 promises, "they will not say again, 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge.'  But everyone will die for his own iniquity; each man who eats the sour grapes, his teeth will be set on edge."
	With the disobedience of Adam and Eve, physical and spiritual death entered the world.  The Bible makes it clear, though, that God never expected a child to be damned for the sins of an ancestor.  There is a big difference between suffering and punishment.
	"Fathers shall not be put to death for {their} sons," God orders in Deuteronomy 24:16, "nor shall sons be put to death for {their} fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin."
	"What do you mean," God asks in Ezekiel 18:1-4, "by using this proverb concerning the land of Israel saying, 'The fathers eat the sour grapes, but the children's teeth are set on edge'? As I live, you are surely not going to use this proverb in Israel anymore. Behold, all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine. The soul who sins will die."
	This is the theme of the entire chapter.
	What does the bible say about the status of children?  As we have seen from Matthew 18:3 and Romans 7:9, children are sinless until the time they are able to willfully disobey God.  Sin is something we do of free will.
	"But each one is tempted when he is carried away and enticed by his own lust," James 1:14-15 states clearly.  "Then when lust has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and when sin is accomplished, it brings forth death."
	Why then, do people promote the idea of original sin?  Well, we have already seen that it is closely bound with other doctrines.  And there may be other explanations. The "Encarta" article notes that belief in original sin seems to increase in response to apocalyptic settings.  In other words, it first grew as the Roman Empire was collapsing.  People struggled to explain world events as being the result of the universal sinful nature of man.  Moving to a time closer to our own, following of this doctrine was rather low preceding World War I.  But, once again, pessimism fueled a revival of this theory after the war.
	Friends, lets not allow ourselves to be tossed about by current affairs, or by man-made doctrines that exist simply to sustain other man-made doctrines.  Let's stick with the truth so that we may be set free.

"Encarta" (C) & (P) 1992-1994 Microsoft Corporation.

Unless otherwise noted, "Scripture taken from the NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE(R), (C) Copyright The Lockman Foundation 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977 Used by permission."