|
The idea that Adam's sin has cursed all of mankind as guilty and all are now separated from God, let alone disabled to do good or interact with God without a new input from God, this is the world of the "original sin" doctrine.
Did the early church believe this?
No.
My earlier article entitled,
The Early Church:
Original Sin
Fallen nature
Man's part in salvation
http://www.jarom.net/Original-sin&GkDads.php
There you can read:
Methodius (c.260-martyred 311AD) says,
sin is an act of personal freedom, without which there is neither sin nor virtue, neither reward nor punishment,
Page 164 HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
by Prof. George Park Fisher
Fisher states "They (these words of Methodius) express the common conviction of the Greek theologians" (also Page 164).
Chrysostom (347-407AD) says that a man would not deserve punishment,
if it were not from his own self that he became a sinner.
Page 165 HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
by Prof. George Park Fisher
Cyril of Jerusalem (c.313-386AD) says explicitly,
we come sinless into the world; we sin now voluntarily.
Cat. IV. 19; see also Cat. IV. 21
George Park Fisher DD LLD in his work History of Christian Doctrine preceded these above quotes with,
A defining characteristic of the Greek anthropology [the early Church Greek Writers/Fathers] is the uniformity and emphasis with which the freedom of the will, and its continued liberty after the incoming of sin, is asserted.
Page 164 HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE by Prof. George Park Fisher
Augustine (354 - 430AD) is the beginning of original sin in theology.
Fisher makes this plain for us, as his summary of Augustine's thinking shows. Please note. This is as accurate and factual a transmission of Augustine's writing and thought on this that you may find anywhere. Any extensive reader of Augustine's works will testify to recognise this reality. This is as plain and simple a synthesis summary of Augustine on this subject; I have deliberately added more paragraph breaks to help view this concentrated sum up:
Augustine's theory rests on the idea that human nature as a whole was deposited in the first man.
This nature, as it came from the hands of God, was pure. The long battle which he [Augustine] had fought with Manichæn philosophy, both in his own soul and after his conversion, made him sedulous [diligent] to avoid their peculiar tenet.
But human nature, existing in its totality in Adam, was corrupted in the first act of transgression, and as such is transmitted to his descendants.
The instrument of this transmission is the sexual appetite. This appetite is itself the fruit of the first sin, as well as the means whereby the sinful nature is communicated from father to son.
The race was embodied in its first representative, and, when the race is unfolded or developed, the qualities which it acquired in his act, which was both generic and individual, appear as the personal possession of each individual at birth.
As a personal act, the first sin was not our act but the act of another; yet it was truly the common act of mankind in their collective or undistributed form of existence. For the consequences of this act all are therefore responsible; and as soon as they exist as individuals, they exhibit in themselves the same corruption of nature, - the same inordinate appetites (concupiscence), and slavery of the will to sin, - which resulted to Adam.
Page 185 HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
by Prof. George Park Fisher
Fisher goes on to quote an earlier Professor of Christian History and doctrine:
This theory would easily blend with Augustine's speculative form of thought, as he had appropriated to himself the Platonico-Aristotelian Realism in the doctrine of general conceptions, and conceived of general conceptions as the original types of the kind realized in individual things.
Neander, Cg. History I. 609. (quoted on page 185 of Fisher)
This thinking of Augustine is, in other words, not rooted in scripture but in Greek thought.
But are there any bible texts used to support this dogma?
Sure, but as in all false teaching, these texts are either read out of context or mistranslated to this very end. Just as the devil misused scripture which he quoted to Jesus as he tempted him in the wilderness: it was out of context.
A text that Augustine used was Romans 5:12 out of a Latin version of this passage whether the (then new) Latin Vulgate version or another. The Latin Vulgate is the first officially approved translation into Latin by Rome's Bishop and was mostly translated by Jerome.
The Greek of the New Testament (NT) is,
DIA
because of |
TOUTO
this |
HÓSPER
even as
|
DI
through |
ENOS
one |
ANTHRÓPOU
man |
Dia + Acc. = because of/due to
Dia + Gen. = through
HÉ
the |
HAMARTIA
sin |
EIS
into
|
TON
the |
KOSMON
world |
EISÉLTHEN
entered (into came) |
KAI
and |
DIA
through |
TÉS
the
|
HARMATIAS
sin |
HO
the |
THANATOS
death |
KAI
and |
HOUTÓS
thus |
EIS
into
|
PANTAS
all |
ANTHRÓPOUS
men |
HO
the |
THANATOS
death |
DIÉLTHEN
passed through
(through came) |
EPH
upon |
HÓ
whom
|
PANTES
all |
HÉMARTON
sinned |
Romans 5:12 Greek - Received Text & Nestle Text
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned-
Romans 5:12
The Vulgate has,
Propterea sicut per unum hominem in hunc mundum peccatum intravit et per peccatum mors et ita in omnes homines mors pertransiit, in quo omnes peccaverunt.
Romans 5:12 Latin Vulgate
This ending in the Latin of "in quo omnes peccaverunt", whether originally from the Vulgate or an older Latin version, it is quoted by Augustine and understood as follows, "in whom [Adam] all sinned". This is the mistranslated and misread "proof text" that is supposed to back up original sin.
Here is Fisher on this thinking by Augustine,
In relation to the doctrine of a generic sin in Adam, we observe that after he became established in this opinion, and through all of his numerous treatises relating to the Pelagian Controversy, there is a great uniformity in his expressions. The same set of propositions and arguments appears and reappears. In that great sin of the first man our nature was deteriorated, and not only became sinful, but generates sinners1. We were all in Adam and sinned when he sinned.
In his interpretation of Romans V.12 [5:12], he first sets aside the supposition that the in quo of the Vulgate refers to "sin" or to "death," and infers that it must refer to Adam himself. "Nothing remains;" he says, "but to conclude that in the first man all are understood to have sinned, because all were in him when he sinned; whereby sin is brought in with birth and not removed save by the new birth."
1De Nupt. Et Concup. II. Xxxiv.
Page 186 HISTORY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE
by Prof. George Park Fisher
Whilst in reality "because all sinned" refers to "and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned" the death spread because as like Adam sinned, so all others who like Adam sinned, they also inherit "death". As Paul made clear in stating "For the wages of sin is death" (Romans 6:23a); upon all who (also) sinned (Romans 5:12b Greek literal - see above).
Romans 5:12 tells us the opposite of what the Latin mistranslation suggests.
Any other proof texts?
Psalm 51:5?
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.
Psalm 51:5
King David, in a context of confessing his own sin with Bathsheba and his own murderous intent on Uriah the Hittite states that he is not alone in sinning, but his own mother also sinned in bringing him into the world.
Does this suggest his mother's sin caused him to sin also?
No.
Because in the preceding verses he clearly states,
For I acknowledge my transgressions, and my sin is ever before me.
Against You, You only, have I sinned, and done this evil in Your sight- That You may be found just when You speak, and blameless when You judge.
Psalm 51:3-4
David recognised that it was his own actions of sinning that made him guilty; it was not his mother's. At best all he is saying in mentioning his mother sinned too, is that I am not alone in this mess. This is no statement that she is guilty for his sin at all. But it is his own heart that needs addressing. And we know this as he carries on saying,
Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts, and in the hidden part You will make me to know wisdom.
Psalm 51:6
And the whole counsel of God in scripture shows us this is so. The fact that we only sin from our youth (Genesis 8:21;Jeremiah 3:25;et al); little ones - babies and infants - are mentioned as having innocent blood (Psalm 106:37-38; Jeremiah 19:4); it is only the soul who sins that dies (Ezekiel 18:20); we start clean (Ecclesiastes 7:29), but we all turn to our own way (Isaiah 53:6). All these are the basic tenets of the inspired text that speak against original sin.
Genesis 6?
I have read accounts that suggest Genesis 6 is proof of man's total depravity and that due to original sin. Total depravity (TD) is not original sin; they are closely related and in practise often mentioned together. TD is a fundamental element of Calvinism. It is required for it to work. All must be held guilty if grace upon only the elect is to be recognised: is the crux of it. So this is quoted,
So God looked upon the earth, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the earth.
Genesis 6:12
This also (used) out of context forgets that Noah and his family were spared and found faithful. Indeed, looking at the genealogies and times of death, we see Noah's parents were also faithful and spared the horror of the flood by dying "just before". The flood was in 1656AC (After Creation) and Noah's dad Lamech died in 1651AC. We are not told how Methuselah, Noah's grandfather died, but his death is recorded as the same year as the flood. Since we know Lamech prophesied in regards to Noah (Genesis 5:29) and that his grandfather was around (Noah's great grandad was Enoch and the first man recorded as never dying for God took him - Genesis 5:24 - he was known as one who "walked with God" also G5:24), so that it may be, the building of the ark was a whole family undertaking with such a historical godly heritage.
Genesis 6 is not a pointer to universal depravity nor original sin; it is a pointer to a great many sinners, but not those who were faithful like Noah. Hence, it is not universal.
Original sin contradicts Scripture
The very idea that we sinned in Adam is a direct contradiction to Scripture.
God could not be clearer than this,
The soul who sins shall die.
Ezekiel 18:4b
And,
Whoever has sinned against Me, I will blot him out of My book.
Exodus 32:33
To be clear, God repeats himself and specifies that,
The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
Ezekiel 18:20
The independent element as distinct from one's parents is clear.
Just as the individual is highlighted here,
We have turned, every one, to his own way.
Isaiah 53:6b
We are sinners by our own sinning;; not someone else's, let alone Adam's. We have turned to our own way means we do not begin in Adam's way, but we identify with Adam's way when we do sin and that is the meaning of Romans 5:12. Not that we sinned in Adam, but that we sinned like Adam.
In my article CHILDREN, YOUTH & ORIGINAL SIN I demonstrate step by step how the bible informs us that our youth is when we first sin. It is not from infancy nor birth. I recommend it.
http://www.jarom.net/from-youth.php
So, why do you believe in original sin if it is foreign to the scripture?
Jesus was clear condemnation (guilt) is not from Adam or a parent; it is your own doing,
this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
John 3:19b
| 
