"Oh, come on," I can hear some say, "lots of people dispute it."
I suppose that depends on your definition of "Original Sin". You see, there are two concepts that go by that name. The first is "The eating of the forbidden fruit by Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden." That would (quite obviously) be the "Original Sin". And that is the clear testimony of Scripture (Gen 3:1-7). That one is not in dispute.
The other, of course, is. The other definition is the doctrine that all humans (with the sole exception of Christ) are born in sin, have a sin nature, are sinners from birth. Now that one isn't as widely accepted.
So where does it come from? Certainly not from the lips of Jesus. He said not one word about it. This, of course, is a dangerous premise to take when determining biblical truth. Jesus never said a word about rape, incest, bestiality, a range of sexual sins. That means they're all fine, right? I hope you don't even begin to think so. Jesus never once used the word, "grace." Apparently He didn't believe in it? Again, don't even start. Determining all true doctrine solely on the basis of Jesus's absence of comment is not a reasonable method. When planning to use Jesus as your sole source for doctrine or practice, remember a few things. 1) It is dodgy logic that makes its proof from the absence of a statement. 2) Jesus said far more than is recorded in the Gospels (John 21:25). Don't assume you have a comprehensive understanding of Jesus's beliefs and values from the few texts in the Gospels. 3) Jesus is called "the Word" (John 1:1). He is the expression of God and anything that God has said (or breathed) comes from Jesus. All of Scripture, then, is "the words of Jesus". If you want a more comprehensive understanding of Jesus's beliefs and values, look at the whole Bible.
So if not from the lips of Jesus, where does it come from? You'll find that the Jews don't believe in it and the liberal Christians don't believe in it and so it must be that Christians that believe in it do so against Scripture, right? It's just those crazy Bible-believing Christians and we can ignore them, right?
I'll tell you where it comes from. It comes from Scripture, where we find some startling statements, even to those who agree with the doctrine. David claimed, "Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me." (Psa 51:5) (Note: if David had been born of adultery or sexual immorality, God forbade him being king (Deut 23:2). He is not saying, "My mother was sinning when she conceived me.") More surprising, David wrote, "The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray from birth, speaking lies." (Psa 58:3) We think of babies as "innocent"; David disagreed. And, as it so happens, so did God. He said, "The intention of man's heart is evil from his youth." (Gen 8:21)1 (The Hebrew term is, literally, "from childhood".) Solomon assured us, "Foolishness is bound up in the heart of a child" (Prov 22:15) (remembering that biblical foolishness is sin, not mere silliness). You can see, then, that the origin of this doctrine is the Old Testament. That Jews don't agree is not a good basis for approving or denying a doctrine found in their Scriptures. (If you're going to determine true doctrine from what the Jews believed, you'll need to remove big things -- essentials -- like the Trinity and salvation by grace through faith. "Jews don't believe in it" would necessarily exclude Jesus as Messiah, too. Don't go there.)
It is also a New Testament claim. We know, for instance, that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." (Rom 3:23) "But," some will object, "that doesn't say that all are born sinful." Maybe, although a universal effect ("all have sinned") requires a universal cause. Paul offers it. "Just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned — for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given." (Rom 5:12-13) Another argument for the doctrine is found in the sad case of infant death. Scripture tells us that "the wages of sin is death" (Rom 6:23). No one dies who has no sin. Infants die. Indeed, sin itself is not the acts we do, according to Jesus. Those acts that we call sin are the result of a heart problem (that we call "sin nature"). Jesus said, "For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false witness, slander. These are what defile a person." (Matt 15:19-20)
There are those friendly and kind voices that would like to tell you that all people are basically good. They do so in the face of the Scriptures, Old and New Testaments. They will tell you that children are innocent. They do so without regard for the staggering numbers of children who die, pointing a finger of horrifying accusation at the justice of God. They will tell you that all we have to do is find our inner good selves and we'll be fine. They like to tell you that, but keep in mind that it disagrees with the constant accusation of Scripture regarding the universal need for salvation because of the universal problem of sin. They do so because of a prior commitment to Man, not God nor His Word. So you should probably consider to which of those two you will give your allegiance.
________
1 It is important to note that God's assessment (and this was God's assessment -- God speaking) is not about actions (sins), but intentions. From childhood the intention of the heart is evil. David said "from the womb." Jesus said that the intention to commit adultery qualified as the sin of adultery (Matt 5:28). The argument that "Sure, they have a tendency to sin but they haven't sinned" doesn't work in Jesus's understanding.
7 comments:
Helpful input. A trusted source just offered an interesting text along this line of thinking. We know that God created Adam in His image (Gen 1:26; Gen 9:6). When Genesis begins an early genealogy in chapter 5, it says, "When God created man, He made him in the likeness of God." (Gen 5:1) It goes on to say, "When Adam had lived 130 years, he fathered a son in his own likeness, after his image, and named him Seth." (Gen 5:3) We humans retain the image of God (Gen 9:6), but we also have the image of Adam, the image of sin (Rom 5:19).
I think there is some misunderstanding about this concept. Is it valid to say that a child in the womb is "sinful"? Is it valid to say that a child in the womb is a "sinner"? (Note the inherent problem -- you have to believe that the thing in the womb is a child ... there is no such thing as "sinful tissue". If you say, "A fetus isn't sinful" you are saying, "A fetus is a human being.") If we agree that it is a child, what did David mean when he said, "In sin did my mother conceive me"? There must be a sense of sinfulness, of being a "sinner", that does not required a transgression of the law. Paul references this in quoting the Psalms when he declares, "There is none who does good; no, not one." (Rom 3:10-12) We know that everyone does "good" at some time or another, so Scripture must be speaking of a different definition of "good", and I would argue that this definition of "good" also supplies the alternate definition of "sin" as well that includes all humans.
Is there a universal sin to which all humans from the child in the womb to the oldest sweet old lady commits continually? Yes, indeed! The single, highest command is "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength." (Mark 12:29-31) All humans from the youngest to the oldest fail to meet that singular command and, in the words of Scripture, "fall short of the glory of God." (Rom 3:23) It is a command that can be transgressed through ignorance and through omission. It requires no overt act. It is what Jesus called "the great and first commandment." (Matt 22:38) Everyone transgresses this command.
You will hear that Augustine was the first to teach this. This isn't accurate. He was the first to expand it because Pelagius taught the opposite, but Irenaeus (Against Heresies 3:22:4; 3:23:2; 5:16:3), Tertullian (The Testmiony of the Soul 3:2), Origen (Commentaries on Rom 5:9), Cyprian and more all recorded the same doctrine. To be sure, none of them ever referred to "Original Sin" ... but that's because none of them spoke English. The doctrine has been from Scripture on through the Early Church Fathers.
Geez, Stan!!!! Don't you know that if the Bible doesn't specifically and explicitly say the words "original sin" that there's no way we can say the Bible teaches the concept??? What's wrong with you.
(end of sarcasm)
Well, if Jesus never said ...
So let's get disturbing.
If this is true, then every baby that has died is in Hell. If not, why not?
It is disturbing because it is human. The question is less disturbing when asked from God's point of view. Whatever God does is good and right. But we don't have God's point of view written down for us, so ...
The surface assumption ("If this is true, then every baby that has died is in Hell") seems to assume that all sinners go to Hell. We know, however, that 1) this would be just, but 2) that it isn't so because of God's grace and mercy. Those who receive Christ are saved. So a few different positions are taken from here. One line assumes that those who never arrive at the maturity to "make a decision" for Christ are held as innocent. Often called "the age of accountability". Another line of thinking holds that God saves the elect. From this line of thinking, two diverge. One says all elect babies are saved; the other says all babies who die are elect and are all saved. The two views -- saved by choosing Christ or saved by being chosen by Christ -- both argue that babies are indeed saved from hell. (The Roman Catholics and a few others believe in baptismal regeneration and believe all baptized babies are saved on that basis.)
Does that answer your question?
Post a Comment