Fairness and Adam's original sin

[MOls (Michelle Ols)]

@Randy

My kids really struggle with the idea that the whole world is messed up from Adam’s sin (which is taught in our tradition)…Not only does this set them up for mistrust of science when they realize that death has always been, but it makes God out to be a vindictive, unjust being, who punishes all of creation for one sin. Our tradition has also said that if Adam didn’t do it, we all would have caused the death and suffering, because we just can’t avoid it. That also seems to make God a rather sadistic creator–who not only sets us all up for failure, but punishes us for his predisposition.

Yes, Randy, I appreciate this struggle that the concept of Original Sin could bring, that it is not fair for God to judge me for Adam’s (or anyone else’s) sin. Thank you for stating that so clearly. This concern is clearly held by many, and so has got me thinking over the past couple of days…

What if we could look at it from an opposite point of view: Perhaps rather than thinking of Original Sin as being unfair, Original Sin is the great equalizer. Since the Fall, all of humanity is now in the same “state” such that no one person can claim to be better than another. We are all guilty of sin, we cannot earn our salvation by doing any number of good works or paying any amount of penance. We are all in the same boat. Thus, by holding to the doctrine of Original Sin, we are setting up the idea of equality between all people. This idea of Original Sin also explains why God’s great sacrifice of Himself, Jesus on the Cross, was necessary for the the salvation of all, and why Jesus would say “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6). Which was a point that @Paul_Allen1 was making.

@Randy

I think that C S Lewis’ and George Macdonald’s views, that God treats our failings are a parent would–with corrective, rather than vindictive, discipline–in our own interest–makes more sense.

I would agree with that assessment that God is not vindictive, but wants the best for us, as a parent cares for their children. That idea is supported in passages like this one in Hebrews 12:

4 In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood. 5 And have you forgotten the exhortation that addresses you as sons?

“My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor be weary when reproved by him.
6
For the Lord disciplines the one he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives.”

7 It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? 8 If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. 9 Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? 10 For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. 11 For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.

I do not agree with the argument against Original Sin that Peter Enns sets up in that article you sited, because there are clear examples of paradox in the Bible, in which two seemingly self-contradictory ideas are actually both true at the same time (bringing this over from comments I already made on Jay’s original sin thread).

One paradox example is:

• Man’s free will
• God’s sovereignty
  Those ideas seem to be mutually exclusive, yet somehow they are both held to be true in the Bible

There are likewise some mysteries about Original Sin, so paradoxes could be contained within that concept, too:

1. We are all responsible for our own sin
2. At some point in time in human history, Sin entered humanity, and it became true that “all have sinned” (Romans 3:23) and “there is no one righteous” (Romans 3:12, Psalms 14:3; Psalms 53:3; Ecclesiastes 7:20)

Notably, point #2 differentiates us from the rest of creation. We do not hold a predator morally responsible for killing its prey. Nor do we say that it is immoral for an alpha male to fight with others of his species to maintain dominance

I do not find the arguments made by Enns or Hart convincing. In Romans, Paul is not only addressing the problem of Judiazers. Paul is addressing both that problem and the problem of our own sin.