Ok, I think that I’ve put this off long enough. After all, it was a request from someone I respect. So, I should probably get on with it.
Oh!
What is “That”?
A couple of months ago a friend messaged me and asked what my thoughts are on “Original Sin.”
Yeah, that “That.”
And, I have, indeed, been putting that off.
I have lots of reasons for not wanting to get involved in that discussion. Perhaps the biggest reason is that the doctrine of Original Sin has no importance to me.
Ok, ok! Give me a few minutes and I’ll get to that!
I also don’t like to get involved in theological discussions about Church dogma.
Much of that is because I don’t consider myself a theologian.
I’m a Bible guy; not a theological guy.
As far as I’m concerned, theologians are the religious embodiment of philosophers. They like to sit around and speculate and argue. And, at the bottom of it all is a desire for certainty. They want to know the “Why we are who we are” answers. In the mist and fog of existential reality they look for a solid rock on which they can stand and say, “Hey look! I found the Answer!
It’s just that no one was really asking any question. At least, not “That” question.
Anyone who has read what I’ve written on the here blog thingy should know that I am quite content to live in the paradox. Now and Not Yet; Life and Life to Come. I am as certain of my uncertainty as I am certain that I’m sitting here typing on non-existent paper right now.
So, theology, as such, holds no real interest for me.
Unless…
Any particular doctrine or belief that arises from the world of Theology is blatantly inaccurate, dangerous, or harmful to people.
Then, it becomes an ethical issue that may demand my attention.
As I’ve considered this particular question about Original Sin, I can see where that dogma may meet those criteria.
It is absolutely inaccurate. It is a danger, especially for those who disagree with it. And, it is harmful to people in that it provides a near-to-hand excuse for accepting evil.
What is ‘Original Sin,’ anyway?
Well, it’s a long convoluted way to try and explain why humans have a knack for doing the wrong thing. In the early days of the Church theologians worked hard to try and understand this new thing called Christianity. They pored over the various texts and traditions that were passed down to them from the beginning. This was all an attempt to make sense of the stories that they held to be inspired by God. Now, without going anywhere near the questions of inspiration and inerrancy, let’s just say that the folks in the 4th century considered every word written in what became the Canon of Scripture to be the absolute truth.
Period.
Yeah, they tried various ways to understand the stories and interpret them, including allegory and metaphor. But, the bottom line was that what was written in the sacred text were the very words of God. And, God would not tell fictions.
This particular doctrine had it’s start in some of the so-called Church Fathers. But, it was articulated in its current form by Augustine of Hippo. Augustine had a rather colorful and, some would say, debauched life before he came to faith in Jesus. As he reflected on his own life of excess and license, he began to ask questions like, How is it that people Sin?
Why does Sin seem to infect everyone without exception?
He found an answer to his questions in the Bible.
In Paul’s letter to the Church at Rome is written,
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Rom. 5:12).
What does that mean?
Well, we need to look waaayyyy back to the third chapter of the Book of Genesis for that answer. That is the story of Adam and Eve and the so-called “Forbidden Fruit.”
In that story Adam and Eve were deceived by a serpent. As a result, they ate some fruit from a tree called, “The Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil.” God had told Adam that was the one tree in all of the Garden of Eden that Adam could NOT eat from.
Having eaten the fruit of the tree, the story says that their eyes were opened and they realized they were naked and yadda, yadda, yadda.
Ok. Augustine and others looked at this story and made some observations.
- Before the serpent enticed the Original Humans to disobey God and eat the fruit,
the world was a pristine paradise. - The Original Humans had Free Will to choose obedience over disobedience.
- By eating the fruit the Original Humans willfully disobeyed God.
- The result of that disobedience was that Sin and Death entered the world and
corrupted it. - God was right and just to punish the Original Humans for their disobedience.
- Sin and guilt were passed on from one generation to the next so that ALL Humanity is
born corrupt and guilty because of Adam and Eve’s transgression.
That’s the crux of it, anyhow.
I am not going to exegete either Gen. 3 or Rom. 5. That would take this post too far afield for the present.
What I can say, after all of this, is that it never happened.
What?
How do I know?
For the doctrine of Original Sin to be valid, there MUST have been a couple of Original Humans. At some point in time, God had to have created Ex Nihilo the world and all that it contains. There had to be a Paradisaical Garden that was pristine and without corruption. And, there had to be a talking serpent.
What we know of the Universe today puts the lie to that story. There were none of the things I listed.
So, If there were no Original Humans, the concept of Original Sin becomes moot.
I know that accepting this opens me up to a lot of other questions. Like, if there was no Original Sin, why did Jesus need to die on a cross? Why is there evil and injustice in the world?
What was the Original Cause to the problems we deal with today?
All of these questions, and more, I’m sure, beg for Certainty. Humans are uncomfortable with the possibility of paradox. Or worse, no good answer at all.
Sorry. Can’t help ya.
Deal with the questions. They don’t require definite answers.
All they desire is to be asked and to make us think.
Be First to Comment