Ephesians 2 provides a clear depiction of the fallen condition of humanity apart from the grace-filled saving work of God, but Romans 5:12 is the locus classicus for discussions about original sin. In this chapter, Paul seeks to expand on his argument in the earlier chapters of Romans by describing the universal impact of the work of Christ, as compared to the universal reality of sin and death in the world.
The doctrine of original sin has fallen on hard times. Celebrated as more “positive” thinking, recent pop publications like Humankind: A Hopeful History propel the sirenic melodies of innate human goodness to an ever-growing audience. The past portrayal of original sin is attributed more to the 17th-century works of Thomas Hobbes than to the Bible, and the new data reveals that we are actually our best selves when we recognize our inner goodness. To many outside the church, the man-as-moral-monster bit simply doesn’t do.
However, there are also others operating within Christian culture who would say a traditional doctrine of original sin is missing the point of the Bible’s message about God’s love and grace.
So, is Christianity’s teaching about sin merely a vestige of times gone by? Is it necessary to the Bible’s message of salvation? Is there a connection between Adam’s sin and my spiritual condition? Does our theology of sin fit with a modern view of the origins of humanity?
The challenge of answering such relevant questions is the breadth of ground they cover—church history, systematic theology, biblical exegesis, philosophy, and now even genetics. However, we are not starting from the ground up in constructing our thoughts about original sin. Christians have been asking similar questions for millennia, and we are stepping into a long stream of holy reflection on what it means to be a human being in a post-Fall world—albeit, now in the 21st century.
What Is Original Sin?
Throughout the history of the Church, there has been considerable agreement over the doctrine of universal sin. Sometimes, this concept can be confused with original sin. However, while related, the two concepts are distinct. Universal sin affirms, with passages like Romans 3:23, that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (ESV), that there is no human being that does not sin—thus, the universal aspect of the doctrine. Sometimes confusion can arise because passages that support universal sinfulness are used as proof texts for original sin (for example, Isa. 64:6). However, many Christians from various denominations would follow the clear teaching of the apostle Paul in affirming the universal impact of sin on humanity.
However, the reality of universal sin raises another question: How does sin spread universally to all humanity? This is the question the doctrine of original sin seeks to answer. What is the mechanism by which sin invades the world? A traditional understanding of the doctrine of original sin states that Adam and Eve’s transgression had a direct impact on the human race so that all of their children—as their progeny—received a fallen nature, characterized by both separation from God and a corrupted moral state. Generally, discussions of original sin begin their reflection by highlighting the writings of Augustine, who argued fervently for original sin during the fourth century A.D. in response to the optimistic anthropology of his opponent Pelagius. Recently, the argument has been made that original sin is more an Augustinian doctrine than a biblical one. Scholars propose that the church’s embrace of original sin is merely one more example of dogma directing exegesis—the church decides on its theology and then makes the Bible fit into the mold. Anyone familiar with Church history knows that such concerns are not without validity, but accusations claiming the Bible doesn’t teach original sin are inaccurate.
Origins and Original Sin
In reflecting on the Bible’s answer to how sin invades humanity, our thoughts naturally drift to the story of our first parents, Adam and Eve. Genesis 3 records how sin entered into the good world that God created, and while there is no explicit statement about how sin will be passed on to other humans, the narrative of chapters 4–11 reveals that the sin of Adam and Eve leaves an indelible stain on their progeny. Sin spreads quickly and severely. When humanity first chafes at the expressed will of God, the rebellion looks like eating a piece of fruit. However, only one generation later, the crime committed is taking the life of a fellow image-bearer. This pattern in the early chapters of the Bible continues until the narrator writes in Genesis 6:5, “The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually” (ESV). The tidal wave of sin that overtakes humanity in these early chapters is woven together with the genealogy of Genesis 5, which demonstrates that human life is getting shorter as sin spreads—lining up with the Pauline teaching thousands of years later: Sin leads to death.
The rapid spread of sin, rebellion, disregard for God’s image, and evil in the world rightly causes us to ask: What happened to Adam and Eve in Genesis 3? Traditionally, proponents of original sin have used the language of a fallen nature to describe the impact sin had on humanity. But some critics of the doctrine have argued that a fallen nature creates problems for Christology. If human nature is now a fallen nature that brings with it moral corruption and guilt, then how can Jesus be truly human (with a fallen nature), and yet truly sinless? If He doesn’t assume a fallen nature, then how can He redeem that which He doesn’t take on? While much reflection has been spent trying to understand the relationship between the human will and human nature, one need not assert a metaphysically transformed fallen nature in the Garden to affirm original sin. The ensuing state of moral corruption and sin that will infect every offspring of the couple flows from their spiritual, relational, and covenantal separation from the life-giving God who created them.
The punishment described in chapter 3 affirms that both the man and the woman will continue their God-given roles in the world (that is, working the soil and bearing children), but because of their sinful rebellion, these tasks will be burdensome, and eventually deadly. Later reference to the image of God in humanity (Gen. 9:6) indicates that people did not cease to be divine image bearers because of the first sin. Adam and Eve did not physically change because of sin; instead, their moral constitution was forever altered because of the severed relationship with their Creator. The narrative of Genesis 3 indicates that death entered the world because of sin and because Adam and Eve were removed from the Garden of Eden (that is, the presence of God and His provision for life in the Tree of Life). In the Garden story, death is characterized by physical mortality and separation from the life-giving Creator God.
Subscribe to Free “Top 10 Stories” Email
Get the top 10 stories from The Aquila Report in your inbox every Tuesday morning.