original sin : original righteousness?

Original Sin" is a false teaching.

The Bible doesn't contain that doctrine.

It was invented by Augustine of Hippo in the 5th century A.D.

It lay mostly dormant for several centuries until it was re-worked by Anselm in the 11th century, and found its way into Medieval philosophy. From there, it became an accepted dogma in Roman Catholic circles, and was eventually handed down to the Protestants.

It is completely unknown among the indigenous Christian churches of Greece, the Balkans, Asia Minor, Africa, Eastern Europe, Russia, the Middle East, Iraq, Iran, and India.

It is based on a misinterpretation of Romans 5:12

Romans 5:12 tells us that sin came into the world when Adam disobeyed God.

The result of that sin was spiritual death - separation from God.

The verse goes on to tell us that everyone since then has also sinned.

It does not say that we inherited sin from Adam. That's an assumption that is forced into the text.

In John 3:7 Jesus said "Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit." In other words - when we are born, we aren't spiritual.

Without a spiritual connection to God, we follow the impulses of our bodies. We do what feels good.

There is nothing inherently sinful about our emotions or bodily pleasures. Sin is a commitment to what pleases us without regard to God's will.

Since we begin at birth to do what comes naturally - fulfilling our physical needs - we learn to commit ourselves to our own pleasure. As we grow and begin to become aware that there is something called "right and wrong", that's when we become aware that we have been seeking self-fulfillment instead of God's honor.

That's when we face temptation.

James 2:14-15 says "each one is tempted when, by his own desire, he is dragged away and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death."

Notice that the temptation comes first. It leads to sin, and sin results in death

There is no such thing as total depravity. That was invented by John Calvin. Even with original sin, there is enough grace left in the soul of humans to choose to do good, and choose to believe in God. If we are totally depraved, we could not do that. Matrimony was instituted before the Fall, and it has always been holy, and did not suffer the consequences of the Fall, making it a unique sacrament, and disproving Calvins invention.

There is also the natural law that is written on every persons heart. Humans instinctivly know that certain things are wrong and certain things are good. Killing is wrong no matter what religion (or no religion) you follow.

People choose to harden their conscience to commit evil acts. Because evil exists does not mean that God willed it.

That depicts personal sin.. and not original sin... Personal sins of the father is not transferable to the son. The term 'original sin' is not even in the Bible. It was just implied to mankind as not having favor in the sight of God because of sins. Rom 3:10 as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one; Rom 3:23 for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God;

Hi there. My hubby explains that the concept of "original sin" originated in the Greek culture. According to my hubby (student anthropologist and avid historian), it was the Greeks who felt that the flesh was innately wicked. When they adopted Christianity, they kept some of their old beliefs, and transferred it to the new doctrines.

I put the concept of "original sin" within Christianity down to the tendency of mankind to continually add their own opinions and cultural experience to what God reveals. It's like Chinese whispers.... The longer timespan between the original prophet or prophecy, and the present day, the more likely the original revealed doctrine will be misrepresented or even forgotten.

I don't believe in the transferral of original sin from parent to child. I believe that humans are children of God, so are innately of divine origin and potential.

EDIT: It's interesting what the others have said about Calvin. As far as I knew, Catholics DO believe in original sin, which is why they have infant baptism. Although I do agree that Catholics seem to be not so focused on emphasising their state of "original sinfulness" and they seem more interested spirituality through ritual.

EDIT 2: Julia, you said that so well. That's what I thought, too.

After God had made all the creatures, He said He wanted to make a creature in His image, in His likeness which He could commune with. So, He made man and woman, meaning we can communicate, reason, think, create, have authority and love. We were made with the ability to live forever IF we obeyed God's express commands. Adam and Eve (representative man and woman) did not and none of us have either. Thus, mankind was barred from eternal life and a gulf was created between us and God. A holy God cannot commune with sinful man. Original sin is that we are born with that same inclination to not obey God and "go our own way." So, God came to Earth as a man, a new Adam so to speak, to bring righteousness to mankind through divine unmerited assistance (grace) and buy us back (redemption) from eternal separation from God-Himself (hell). He did this by paying the price for our sins, past, present and future, by being crucified on the cross. His resurrection defeated sin and death. The war is over but the battles rage on for awhile. Whomever believes that God did this in the name of Jesus will have eternal life-(heaven). That is what the good news is (the word "gospel" in Greek). I guess you could say that when we are "born again" with the indwelling Holy Spirit (mind of Christ), THEN we can have original righteousness.

That's interesting, as it was the Catholic Church who came up with the idea of Original Sin in the first place. (not the Greeks as someone else has said)

=============================

"The doctrine of original sin was first developed in second-century Bishop of Lyon Irenaeus's struggle against Gnosticism. The Greek Fathers emphasized the cosmic dimension of the Fall, namely that since Adam human beings are born into a fallen world, but held fast to belief that man, though fallen, is FREE." -- Wiki

=============================

I don't think that the Catholics have dumped the idea of Original Sin, because this would completely get rid of any need for Jesus having died as payment for Original Sin.

The Protestants didn't invent it, they got it from the Catholic Church and took it with them when they split off.

So I'd be looking a little deeper into that Catholic statement you're quoting about believing that we are all inherently good.

My educated guess would be that it means returning to the state of "Original Righteousness" that Adam and Eve were in before they ate of the fruit and brought evil into the world.

I think this person you're quoting probably means that this "Original Righteousness" of Adam and Eve is our TRUE nature.

Along with that (of course) must be the doctrine that the Original Sin they brought into the world can only be erased by believing in Jesus as your savior.

Then after accepting Jesus, a person returns to their God-given nature of "Original Righteousness" and is from then on free from Original Sin.

That's my best guess as to what the person meant.

Here's the truth Adam and Eve's Transgression was the original sin. But in a way I wasn't sin? because the Lord told them not to partake of the fruit but he also told them to multiply

and replenish the earth. They couldn't do both so they had a choice to make. They made the right one and was cast out of the Garden were they had to work but also now they could have children. That couldn't happen in the Garden so did they really sin. No they transgressed. But Jesus Christ atonement paid for that sin. we do have to we just have to worry about our own? All that ever was on this earth are Gods Children. Yes they were all good in the beginning but Satan and his angels are here and some people are weaker than others and let Satan totally take them over you know who I mean? Hitler, Osama, Mussolini, Stalin, The Kaiser. Cain? We have to become Good by doing the things God asks us to do we are not here for a free ride? we must prove ouselves worthy. To go where God is we must be perfect like him. The happy Mormon www.lds.org

When you start talking about God, how he created us and loves us, how we are like him, and all that stuff, when you start from scratch talking about it, almost immediately the question arises: "If God is perfect and his creation is perfect, and WE are created by God, then why are we so imperfect? Why is life on earth so imperfect?"

ALL religions try to explain this. The Greeks had Pandora's box. Jews and Christians have Adam and Eve. Life is imperfect because Adam and Eve were rebellious and they were punished for it and that sin still is on our 'permanent record' when we are born. We need to be saved because of this. And we need to overcome our rebellious nature.

(Some) Protestants have taken it even further. Calvin, for instance, basically though that people were just evil, except a very few who God had chosen to favor. The rest of us had no chance! Calvin's ideas had great influence on later Christian movements--the Puritans for instance.

Now personally I don't believe this. We each have a potential for good or evil, and which way you go is up to you. I think we all agree on that. I do not believe that we are guilty because some distant ancestor ate fruit. That seems just silly to me. But that kind of thought is useful in using religion to control people, to justify an official clergy, etc.

I don't take Genesis literally. It seems to me to be obviously meant to be taken allegorically. But it seems to me that God designed Adam and Eve deliberately to eat the fruit. He KNEW they were going to eat it as soon as his back was turned (again, allegorically speaking, because God doesn't have a back). Leaving them alone in a garden where they could eat anything, use anything, except this one beautiful tree right in the middle of the garden, that was like leaving a four-year-old alone in a room with a wedding cake.

And what if they hadn't eaten the fruit? There would have been no story. Only a perfect couple living in Eden forever. The Bible would be twelve pages long. And none of us would be here to read it!

God designed man with the curiosity to look at the world and the universe around him, the intelligence and intellectual capacity to gather information and figure things out for himself, and the 'rebellious' nature to think independently. These are great gifts! From this I take it that God WANTS us to think for ourselves. So he put "the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil" within our grasp, knowing that there are costs and disadvantages that come with independence and freedom but that it's how we have to be.

The way to deal with this is to put these ideas in their proper perspective in history. When God created the first man and women their eyes were closed to the awarness of good and evil and they enjoyed living in a sinless state in the life in the Holy Spirit. This would be how some arrive at saying that something from God cannot be evil. However, when the first man broke the covenant with God and their eyes opened and they began living through the awareness of good and evil they chose evil and sin entered in to the world. When each of us first sinned our eyes opened and we began living through the awareness of good and evil, which resulted in all of us because all have sinned in becoming condemned to die a second death in a place called the lake of fire, where there will be mourning, weeping and gnashing of teeth because they will have realized that they missed being saved by rejecting Jesus Christ and thereby rejecting the death He died and arose from for them.

I believe both interpretations to be incorrect.

When I read genesis, I see it as an allegorical tale of Man's rise to sentience.

One of the differences between us and the animals is a knowledge of what constitues good and evil. Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil = inception of sentience.

That would mean that God threw us out of a "Garden of Eden", ie, a place where we were kept as pets, because it is wrong to keep sentient beings as pets - it stunts their development.

That would mean that God was never mad at us - we left Eden for different reasons. Early man might have THOUGHT he was being punished because he went from a life of liesure to a harsher lifestyle, but in reality it was needed to enable him to grow.

But, if God was never mad at us, we wouldn't need the services of a church to intercede on our behalf.

And what would all those clergy do for a living then?