After some readings on the doctrine of Original Sin, I am prompted to state what I believe is the very essence of Scripture on that subject.
The problem of Original Sin is definition. Augustine and the Calvinists believe that Original Sin triggered by the disobedience of Adam and Eve made humanity totally depraved, guilty of sin (and therefore condemnation). Those of you who are familiar with my blog site may have read my refutation of the 5 points of TULIP (Relational Theology's response to the Five Points of Calvinism) specifically the Total Depravity of Man. You may consider this current article as a follow up or sequel on that one.
The early Greek fathers actually did not agree with Augustine on his definition of Original sin but Martin Luther did. We can appreciate the complexity of settling this issue. However, it seems to me that if we fully discern the nature of God in Scripture, we will conclude that neither Augustine nor John Cassian were exactly correct in their definitions.
The Main Issues
The first problem with original sin is that the church fathers who proposed it did not teach that innocence trumps original sin. That means that forgiveness is not necessary for man in original sin if they have not reached the gray line of the age of accountability. If this is not taught, then infants who have not had the chance to willfully sin would automatically go to hell if they died as infants. Furthermore, all aborted babies end up in hell. Not only does that sound tragic, it is not biblical because it mars the correct concept of God.
Although there seems to be no direct teaching from scripture that babies go to heaven automatically, the allusion of Christ to the humility, faith and innocence of little children as necessary to enter the kingdom of heaven strongly implies the same concept. Now, in contrast, there is not a single Bible statement in Scripture that even hints that innocents end up automatically in hell except for this mistaken definition of Original Sin.
The second problem with the classical definition of original sin is the fact that it results in total depravity as the Calvinists define it. We have already pointed out that this is NOT a biblical concept and runs in direct contradiction to the meaning of man being created in God's image (see Relational Theology's response to the Five Points of Calvinism). Hence, no further discussions are needed here except to say that if man's response to salvation is entirely a divine act of the sovereign God, then we are portraying a god who is just playing with himself and there are obvious undertones of hypocrisy in this god. Fortunately, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is a real, sincere God whose kheced (Hebrew for steadfast/unfailing love) never ends and whose emeth (Hebrew for faithfulness) never changes.
Original Sin Clarified
So Original Sin, in order to be a Biblical doctrine has either to be redefined or clarified and we define it as simply the natural tendency to sin. What we inherited from Adam is the natural tendency to sin but not the sin (and corresponding condemnation) itself. However, similar to temptations that are not acted upon, original sin does not automatically make man condemned.
The First and Second Adam
Romans 5:12-21 may be interpreted or MIS-interpreted and careful exegesis must be applied to that passage. V.12 says, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned". Statements like these may be interpreted both ways. Also much "stronger" is verse 18, "Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all." However, Paul is very careful with words and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amplifies that care, the next verse is quite instructive. "For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous." Note that Paul used the word "the many" instead of "all" this time (see also verse 15). So verse 18 was the general principle but verse 19 is the detailed application.
Putting this another way, in the same way that through Christ (the second Adam), justification became available but not necessarily effectual for all but only those who volitionally receive Christ as Lord and Savior, the same is true with the first Adam, sin and death exercised dominion on all but effective only to the "many" who chose to willfully exercise that tendency.
Many times, to perform accurate and honest hermeneutics, one has to get the correct "big picture" in order to grasp the truths in the details. Context before mere words. Bigger context before the smaller context.
The problem of Original Sin is definition. Augustine and the Calvinists believe that Original Sin triggered by the disobedience of Adam and Eve made humanity totally depraved, guilty of sin (and therefore condemnation). Those of you who are familiar with my blog site may have read my refutation of the 5 points of TULIP (Relational Theology's response to the Five Points of Calvinism) specifically the Total Depravity of Man. You may consider this current article as a follow up or sequel on that one.
The early Greek fathers actually did not agree with Augustine on his definition of Original sin but Martin Luther did. We can appreciate the complexity of settling this issue. However, it seems to me that if we fully discern the nature of God in Scripture, we will conclude that neither Augustine nor John Cassian were exactly correct in their definitions.
The Main Issues
The first problem with original sin is that the church fathers who proposed it did not teach that innocence trumps original sin. That means that forgiveness is not necessary for man in original sin if they have not reached the gray line of the age of accountability. If this is not taught, then infants who have not had the chance to willfully sin would automatically go to hell if they died as infants. Furthermore, all aborted babies end up in hell. Not only does that sound tragic, it is not biblical because it mars the correct concept of God.
Although there seems to be no direct teaching from scripture that babies go to heaven automatically, the allusion of Christ to the humility, faith and innocence of little children as necessary to enter the kingdom of heaven strongly implies the same concept. Now, in contrast, there is not a single Bible statement in Scripture that even hints that innocents end up automatically in hell except for this mistaken definition of Original Sin.
The second problem with the classical definition of original sin is the fact that it results in total depravity as the Calvinists define it. We have already pointed out that this is NOT a biblical concept and runs in direct contradiction to the meaning of man being created in God's image (see Relational Theology's response to the Five Points of Calvinism). Hence, no further discussions are needed here except to say that if man's response to salvation is entirely a divine act of the sovereign God, then we are portraying a god who is just playing with himself and there are obvious undertones of hypocrisy in this god. Fortunately, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob is a real, sincere God whose kheced (Hebrew for steadfast/unfailing love) never ends and whose emeth (Hebrew for faithfulness) never changes.
Original Sin Clarified
So Original Sin, in order to be a Biblical doctrine has either to be redefined or clarified and we define it as simply the natural tendency to sin. What we inherited from Adam is the natural tendency to sin but not the sin (and corresponding condemnation) itself. However, similar to temptations that are not acted upon, original sin does not automatically make man condemned.
The First and Second Adam
Romans 5:12-21 may be interpreted or MIS-interpreted and careful exegesis must be applied to that passage. V.12 says, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned". Statements like these may be interpreted both ways. Also much "stronger" is verse 18, "Therefore just as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all." However, Paul is very careful with words and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amplifies that care, the next verse is quite instructive. "For just as by the one man’s disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous." Note that Paul used the word "the many" instead of "all" this time (see also verse 15). So verse 18 was the general principle but verse 19 is the detailed application.
Putting this another way, in the same way that through Christ (the second Adam), justification became available but not necessarily effectual for all but only those who volitionally receive Christ as Lord and Savior, the same is true with the first Adam, sin and death exercised dominion on all but effective only to the "many" who chose to willfully exercise that tendency.
Many times, to perform accurate and honest hermeneutics, one has to get the correct "big picture" in order to grasp the truths in the details. Context before mere words. Bigger context before the smaller context.
No comments:
Post a Comment