Q) Some teach the following. Adam and Eve (the first people) sinned. After their fall, this sinful nature was passed down along generations. You and I therefore have a sinful nature because we are Adam’s descendants according to this teaching. We are therefore born sinners. In sin we were conceived and we have a natural willingness to do what is wrong because it is how we are.
A) Perhaps the disciples of Jesus had also heard this teaching before John 9:1-2(NCV)
As Jesus was walking along, he saw a man who had been born blind. His followers asked him, “teacher, whose sin caused this man to be born blind-his own sin or his parents’ sin?”
Perhaps they asked to know which Rabbi’s teaching Jesus leaned to in regard to original sin teaching. Judaism generally teaches against this doctrine. It is safe to say that the context of this verse is the relationship between sin and death or sin and its consequences in the natural world. Throughout Christian history the teaching of original sin has been debated in various ways. Some like Augustine affirmed it, Pelagious disputed it. The various arguments for and against take various courses.
3. Jesus answered, “It is not this man’s sins or his parents’ sin that made him be blind. This man was born blind so that God’s power could be shown in him. While it is daytime, we must continue doing the work of the One who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” (NCV.
On the teaching that original sin is true, I find this giving more power to evil than we should. If we are ok to propose that evil can be handed down in the DNA of a man then why is salvation which is good not handed down in the DNA of man? If Mary had this sinful nature as a result of her lineage to Eve (Gen2:26) and her DNA was in Jesus as a result of Immaculate Conception, was Jesus therefore born with a sinful nature? Or was the conception immaculate because it did not have the seed of a man but only the seed of a woman hence sinful nature is not in women? I believe Jesus was spotlessly conceived.
I believe babies are born as natural beings. Not good as Pelagious taught or evil as Augustine taught.
Through the bible we see God creating man in four ways from his word;
1) He got dust from the ground and blew into it (Gen2)
2) He got a rib from a man and formed Eve (Gen2:)
3) He got the ovum of a woman and formed Jesus (Luke, Gen2)
4) sexual procreation (Psalms)
In Gen2:1 God looked at all he had created and called it good. Babies are hence not naturally good but good because God calls them good. In Psalms children are called a gift from God. James1:27 says every good gift is from God who has no evil in him. With this word, children are good. As children grow, they are taught obedience. Jesus learned obedience (Hebrews). You cannot therefore say children are naturally bad (as in you cannot teach a child to do bad things) for they are learning obedience like Jesus as they grow. Jesus grew in wisdom (luke2:).Ezek18 gives a matrix of good parent-bad child, bad parent-good child and in vs4 affirms it is the person who sins who will die. Psalms affirms that God punishes the generations of those who hate him but has mercy on those who love him.
How would we argue with the creation story? Did Adam’s nature have elements of the dust/ground? Yes. The same compounds found on the earth were in Adam’s body. Did Eve have the nature of Adam? Yes. Her composition had elements from Adam. Did Jesus have the elements of Mary? You can say NO or YES. You can say YES because you understand baby development in the womb or NO and argue that God did not allow any of Mary’s nature into Jesus. From the two preceding thoughts of how God created it is safe though to say that Jesus had part of Mary’s nature and the Holy Spirit in his body. Parents generally pass their DNA to their children
One may object by saying that the sinful nature is spiritual and not natural. Hence Jesus (may have) had the natural elements of his body from Mary but not the spiritual sinful nature from her. I would respond that if through Adam the whole world is judged guilty of sin hence the spiritual nature of sin, then through Jesus the whole world is justified from sin, through the work of salvation hence righteous (1cor). But not everybody has this new nature of Christ even though Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. This nature is appropriated by faith therefore not everyone has the Adamic sin nature.
As for the consequences of sin being attributed to original sin I refer to Jesus response to the disciples in John9 above. What of death due to original sin? Was the death physical or was it spiritual separation from God or both? Jesus said he conquered sin and death (spiritual separation from God). The bible adds the last enemy Jesus defeats will be death (physical).
1corithians says these three things remain; hope, faith and love. I want us to share in hope. To hope that God is good and his mercies endures forever. To hope that in the fullness of time we will understand all things. Hope with me that I will see my two siblings in heaven who died as babies and not hell because someone said they were born with a sinful nature. Hope with me that my friend who had a mentally challenged brother who died will be in heaven and not hell because he couldn’t make an intellectual comprehension when alive to receive Jesus and was born with a sinful nature. Hope with me that my friend (who’s born again) who performed an abortion and is really sorry for it will see her baby in heaven and not hell because someone says she conceived in sin. Hope with me that God understands. Let’s hope that this understanding attribute of God is his very nature. He therefore can be nothing but understanding that we call him Just. Hope with me that we may fall truly, madly, and deeply in love with God even when we don’t understand things for understanding is not part of our very nature. Allow me to hope; to hope with you too.
Delta theism therefore provides a manifesto of hope to original sin doctrine. It does not deny it
