World Religion Essay: Exploring the Doctrine of Original Sin

This essay delves into the doctrine of original sin, a central concept within Christianity, examining its historical context, theological significance, and ongoing debates. The essay begins by defining original sin as the belief that all humans are born with a sinful nature due to Adam and Eve's disobedience. It then presents arguments in favor of the doctrine, citing biblical verses like Romans 5:12 and highlighting its theological benefits, such as promoting human equality and emphasizing the consequences of rebellion against God. However, the essay also explores counter-arguments, including criticisms from liberal theologians and theistic evolutionists who question the doctrine's compatibility with scientific understanding and its interpretation of biblical texts. The essay concludes by acknowledging the complexities surrounding the doctrine, suggesting a balanced perspective that considers both primary and secondary causes of sin, and recognizing the ongoing relevance of Adam's role in Christian theology.

World
Religion
Running Head: World Religion 0
3 / 1 8 / 2 0 2 0
Student’s Name

World Religion 1
The thesis statement for the essay presented hereby is “the doctrine of original sin is not
original in the true sense and one should not believe in it”. The objective to present this essay is
to develop an understanding of the doctrine of “original sin” which is well known in Christianity.
The doctrine is required to discuss, as it is argumentative for years and existence and source of
the same has also been a topic of debate always.
Before moving towards the source and truth of the doctrine, the first meaning of the same
is necessary to understand. It is an Augustine Christian doctrine according to that everyone is
born sinful (Cheng). This doctrine believes that every person is born to disobey God and is guilty
in Adam. The doctrine has a clear interpretation as per that corruption element in human nature
as a result of the first sin done by Adam and eve and due to the same, every other person is
sinful. The subjective doctrine has huge significance in the Roman Catholic Church and had its
critics. On the different side, many Christians do not feel that the subject is controversial within
the religion they practice i.e. Christianity. To discuss the argument in favor of this doctrine first
this is to state that several lines can be found in the Bible itself that provide evidence of this
doctrine and assure that all humans are born with sinful nature cause of Adam’s sin ("Author:
Jesus Didn't Believe In 'Original Sin' And Neither Should We - Religion News Service"). The
beginning point of this doctrine reflects under Romans 5:12. It says that the sin came into the
world through one man, and later on, death came through sin therefore death spread into the
world because every human has sinned. The verse is developed on the belief that there cannot be

World Religion 2
a fossil before fall. Death came only after man sinned. Supporting this claim, Genesis considers
sin as rebellion against God and death as a result of the same (Brazier and Wolfe). The important
point to bring in attention is that the text remains silent about animals or any other life. In this
manner, the text fails to justify that animals, plant or any other life did not experience death
before the fall ("The Doctrine Of Original Sin"). Pursuing arguments of doctrine in favor of
some usefulness of the same is necessary to discuss here. The first theological benefit of doctrine
is related to universality that focuses on the equality of humans and believes that no human is
better than other and they all are sinful. Secondly, the doctrine teaches that it is not inevitable
that Eve or Adam would not respect or obey God. In addition to this, the doctrine also believes
that evil is nothing but a result of human rebelliousness. St Augustine, the person who devised
the theory of studied sin believed that the same has been transmitted to the 21st century and the
current generation through sexual intercourse. He further believes that it also transmit sickness
and spread sinful nature among human being ("BBC - Religions - Christianity: Original Sin").
Now moving to another side of the coin this is to state that many people consider the
subjective doctrine as baseless. They think that humanity is not inherently bad but the same is
good inherently. There are also other reasons due to that scholar does not accept this doctrine.
Karl Giberson one of the liberal critics rejects the same as beliefs in evolution. He has written a
book named “Saving the Original Sinne” where he also claimed that Christians should also not
accept this doctrine. He stated that Christianity should be evolved in a free environment. People

World Religion 3
are required to believe in sin and transmission of the same. Further, he rejected the doctrine as
found not being original to the details mentioned in Romans 5:12. Similar to Giberson, Dr. Denis
Alexander, theistic evolutionist also reject the sin of originality and believes that Romans 5:12
has been misinterpreted for years and it does not tell that sin inherits from Adam but it is the
individual acts of human that reflect and promote sins. He further made it clear that the word
“because all sinned” given in Romans 5:12 refers to the personal sin of people. The translation of
this Greek text has been wrong as “in whom all sinned”. Yet it not compulsory that one should
always teach from Roman 5:12. One the American scholar, Thomas Schreiner stated that one
should identify two causes, which the roman text indicates, which are primary and secondary
causes. The text gives an understanding that the death came cause of Adam’s sin and later on
people sin and die. It means Adam's disobedience can be understood as the primary cause and
individual disobedience can refer to a secondary cause. The main issue is that throughout
Romans 5:12–21, Paul focused on the unity of sinners in Adam only and never paid attention to
the individual sinner. In this way, he believed and also made others believed that people have
turned out to the sinner cause of Adam’s disobedience. The work of Paul seems really inspiring
and significant in the area of study of this doctrine as he focused on meaning and significance of
Adam. In Genesis 3 he has provided theological justification for the results of Adam’s fall (5:12
and Turpin). Theistic evolutionists have further recognized that the respective doctrine is not
compatible with evolution. The reason behind the same is that as per principles of evolution,

World Religion 4
physical death is there in the world since ever. If to consider Adam’s disobedience as a reason
for spiritual death the for what reason Christ has to die physically. One can generally understand
that God is responsible for all the evil and suffering if the same does not have an understanding
and explanation of Adam's falling.
After considering facts and arguments if different sides, this is to state that being the first man,
Adam is vital to a range of theology yet the one mandatory doctrine is “original sin”.
Nevertheless, due to evolutionary thinking of religious texts, the same is being eroded. This
evolution does not only undermine the studied sin but also undermine the “doctrine of salvation”.
In a conclusive way to state that many of the followers of Christianity believe in the doctrine and
held Adam liable for all the sin and provision of death, some counter-arguments are also there.
Nevertheless, a mixture of both the arguments seems a good option to adopt which has
recognized by Schreiner i.e. primary and secondary causes.

World Religion 5
References
"Author: Jesus Didn't Believe In 'Original Sin' And Neither Should We - Religion News
Service." Religion News Service. N.p., 2020. Web. 18 Mar. 2020
<https://www.pinterest.co.kr/pin/308707749453568701/?
amp_client_id=CLIENT_ID(_)&mweb_unauth_id=%7B%7Bdefault.session%7D
%7D&from_amp_pin_page=true>
"BBC - Religions - Christianity: Original Sin." Bbc.co.uk. N.p., 2020. Web. 18 Mar. 2020 <
https://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/beliefs/originalsin_1.shtml>
5:12, Original, and Simon Turpin. "Original Sin: How Original Is It? Romans 5:12." Answers in
Genesis. N.p., 2020. Web. 18 Mar. 2020
<https://answersingenesis.org/sin/original-sin/how-original-is-it-romans-5-12/>
Brazier, P. H, and Judith Wolfe. C.S. Lewis-On The Christ Of A Religious Economy, 3.1. La
Vergne: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2013. Print.
Cheng, Patrick S. From Sin To Amazing Grace. New York: Seabury Books, 2012. Print.

World Religion 6
"The Doctrine Of Original Sin." Miqlat.org. N.p., 2020. Web. 18 Mar. 2020
<https://www.miqlat.org/the-doctrine-of-original-sin.htm>