The Case Against Original Sin

In Genesis we are told that in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. According to the much of the Church, this first sin has corrupted the entire human race since. Like some kind of disease, the sin is hereditary, their sin is now our sin; everyone is born into a general state of sinfulness. It's called Original Sin and because of Adam and Eve we are all sinful as our default natural state.

However the Original Sin concept is not mentioned anywhere in scripture, it is contradicted by scripture, and contradicts common sense.

Psalm 139:13-14 'For you [God] created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.'

So God has created each and everyone of us; our fleshly bodies, the beginnings of a soul, and His spirit of life breathed into us. So where does the sin come in? If created by God, then how can that which comes from God be sinful in its nature? All that comes from God is whole, and right, and good.

Deuteronomy 24:16 'Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin.'

Ezekiel 18:4, 17b-18a 'Everyone belongs to me, the parent as well as the child - both alike belong to me. The one who sins is the one who will die. …...He will not die for his father’s sin; he will surely live. But his father will die for his own sin........'

So just what has Adam and Eve's sin of disobedience got to do with us? Nothing, absolutely nothing. Their sin was entirely born by them and does not have any effect on our own standing before God. Your parents sinned and they will give their account to God, you sin and you will give your account, and likewise your children.

Genesis 4:6-8 'Then the LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”'

Here is Cain, Adam's son, so if there ever was a case for hereditary sin, Cain would be the first to be infected. But that's not God's opinion at all. Cain wasn't some helpless feeble human who could not resist sin, whose natural state is sinful with a natural compulsion to sin. God is plainly telling him to rule over the sin. That is, within Cain he was empowered to reject sin; he could choose to sin or not to sin. God's opinion was that Cain could live a sinless life if he chose to do right and not wrong. We are no different from Cain in this regard.

So where does the doctrine of original sin come from? As far as I can tell it's from a particular interpretation of the following verses:

Romans 5:12 'Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned.'

Adam and Eve were the first to sin, and so through them sin first entered the world. The consequence of their sin was that the Tree of Life was now off limits, so death comes to the whole human race. However, there is nothing here to justify a concept of inherited sin.

Romans 5:19 'For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.'

What does it mean that the 'many were made sinners'? It is an assumption to say this is inheritance, and one could easily understand this to mean that the many sinned by following Adam's example. Bad company corrupts good character is a well known phrase. If we interpret this as some auto-inheritance of sin then by logical progression we must also interpret 'many will be made righteous' as an auto-inherited righteousness too. Yet this is not something that the church would sanction. One cannot have one's cake and eat it. Similarly if we interpret 'many made sinners' as applying to each and every person, then by logical progression we must also interpret 'many will be made righteous' as each and every person. Yet again, the Church cannot accept every person on Earth in the last 2000 years being made righteous. Again one cannot have one's cake and eat it.

1 Corinthians 15:21-22 'For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.'

Are these verses talking about sin? No, they are talking about physical death and resurrection. Just as Romans 5:12, the Tree of Life was now off limits to all mankind, and now all mankind experiences physical death because of Adam. One can only interpret these verses to be talking about Original Sin by distorting their meaning.

So was there a Fall of Man? This phrase is not found in scripture anywhere. There simply was no fall of mankind as some great cataclysmic event wrecking God's pinnacle of creation. Adam and Eve fell from what they were created to be and we stumble and fall when we sin. The fall of man is something we just do as individuals in our own right from a place of created perfection.

So why do we need a saviour? Because even though we are all born pure and sinless, and we can all choose to sin or not to sin, at some time in our lives we do all sin. There is none righteous, not one, and all have sinned and fallen short of God's requirements. But don't let anyone force such a pessimistic view on you by saying that you are naturally sinful and you can't help it. You are better than that.

More by this Author

  • The Case Against Eternal Torment

    The purpose of this study is to examine the case against eternal torment in the Lake of Fire for those that do accept Christ as saviour in this life. Of course many of you have already made up your minds and are quite...

  • The Evolution of Satan - Part 1

    The purpose of this study to is look at how Satan has evolved over the centuries. The image we have of Satan now is quite different from the image that Judaism has and when looking at the Old Testament texts, the Satan...

  • The Unbiblical Christian Tithe

    The purpose of this hub is to demonstrate from scripture that the current received wisdom on the subject of tithing taught in many sections of the Church is in error. At best, these sections have a complete...

Comments 55 comments

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

I agree, we certainly do not inherit sin.

God wanted to create mankind to have a Give (God) and Take (Mankind) relationship.

He wanted mankind to love him with all their hearts, so he gave us free will

We are all born with the ability to sin, and the ability not to although many teach that we can not be sinless.. Choice

The Hebrew word translated as good is ??? and is pronounced tov

In Genesis he calls his creations "good". The Hebrew words almost always relate descriptions to functionality. The word tov should have been translated "functional". God declared that his creation is "functioned". He did not see it as "good", he saw it as functional. The Hebrew word "ra" means dysfunctional. The Bible uses the words tov and ra for the tree of the knowledge of "good" and "evil". The word "ra" doesn't mean evil and should have been translated as "dysfunctional". The knowledge of opposites.

Knowing you can follow God's way, or do what you want even if it's not good for you

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 5 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Thankyou Deborah for you comments. You explanation for 'good' and 'evil' is interesting. I shall have to think about that one.

Titen-Sxull profile image

Titen-Sxull 5 years ago from back in the lab again

Hi Disappearinghead, this hub is very informative but it sort of makes me wonder if you are a believer or not. I mean here you are tearing down one of the doctrinal pillars of modern Christianity. Anyway I did have one sort of counter-argument to offer to what you said here:

"However, there is nothing here to justify a concept of inherited sin."

While original sin isn't in scripture inherited sin IS, in fact it's right in the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20.

"You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments."

Now I suppose you could argue that in context this applies only to those who hate Yahweh and worship false gods however it's still a sin, and it's punishment, being inherited by future generations.

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 5 years ago from Wales, UK Author

High TS, thanks for reading and commenting.

True this is one of the doctrinal pillars of Christianity, but I simply do not accept it. I am a believer in the coming of God in the flesh, aka, Jesus who then shed His blood as a sacrifice for our sin. However, the original sin doctrine would have us believe we are all useless filthy worthless sinners from birth, which makes no sense in the light of scripture.

I'm taking the view of reform Judaism on this one who see the Church's opinion of man as being extremely pessimistic. Accordingly most Jews today read your quote from Exodus 20 with the emphasis on the "of those who hate me". It's not that the children by default are being punished for their parents sin, as that would contradict what Moses later said in Deut 24, and Ezekiel. God punishes those children of the 3rd and 4th generation who themselves hate Him.

The key think is that God loves to a thousand generations from those who love Him. Assuming a generation is 25 years, then from the giving of th law, God's love lasts 25,000 years, which comfortably tells us that His love endures forever.

Titen-Sxull profile image

Titen-Sxull 5 years ago from back in the lab again

"God punishes those children of the 3rd and 4th generation who themselves hate Him."

But it states that the sins of the parents will be visited upon the children. Regardless of whether the children themselves love Yahweh punishing them for sins that are not their own is wrong. It does however go along with much of what happens in the Old Testament, such as the Egyptian first born. It seems Pharaoh's genocide against the Hebrews, his SIN, is passed on to the first born of Egypt. This doesn't at all seem just or righteous to most people today because we've left an eye for an eye behind.

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 5 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Hi TS,

The phrase "the sins of the parents will be visited upon the children" is a popular phrase that people quote, but just where is it written? I've just done a search on the words "parents, sins, children and this phrase is not found. This punishing to the 3rd and 4th generation is a phrase that is used on four occasions, but like I said, I take the reform Judaism view that this is only enacted if those children themselves hate Him.

However, on four occasions God declared that children will not be put to death for the sins of their parents.

With regards to Egypt, it doesn't seem likely that only Pharaoh oppressed the Hebrews, whilst the rest of the Egyptian population were their happy loving neighbours. The Hebrews were slaves to the entire country, so the whole population exploited and abused them. Pharaoh is the focal point because he is the country's leader. Now after nine plagues he still wouldn't let them got. How many plagues does it take? What is the final ultimate sanction that would bring about a change in attitude?

Trish_M profile image

Trish_M 5 years ago from The English Midlands

An interesting take on sin and the Bible.

Thanks :)

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

It also says:

Ezekiel18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Sin is not inherited.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

Ezekiel 18:2-4

2. What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge?

3. As I live, saith the Lord GOD, ye shall not have occasion any more to use this proverb in Israel.

4. Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die.

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 5 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Thanks Trish for reading.

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 5 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Thanks Deborah for more evidence against original sin.

MysteryPlanet profile image

MysteryPlanet 5 years ago

Excellent points and I agree that according to the teachings throughout the Bible we are responsible for ourselves and not for the "sins of our fathers"

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 5 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Absolutely MysteryPlanet. Furthermore, come the judgment each of us is judged in accordance with what WE as individuals have done. So how can we carry any consequence of other's sins in life when we don't in death.

Titen-Sxull profile image

Titen-Sxull 5 years ago from back in the lab again

The language is right there in Exodus 20:

"You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, PUNISHING THE CHILDREN FOR THE SINS OF THE PARENTS to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me"

Most translations read the sins of the Father rather than the sins of parents. Regardless of whether or not these children hate Yahweh according to the Bible they are being punished for the sin's their parents (or at least Father's) committed. Reform Judaism may get around this with a bit of apologetics but it doesn't change what Exodus 20 actually says, which is located amongst the text of the first commandment.

"Now after nine plagues he still wouldn't let them got."

This is because God wanted to complete the final plague. You can read the story for yourself. God hardens Pharaoh's heart so that he can go out into Egypt and get revenge. In Exodus 10 just after the plague of darkness God hardens Pharaoh's heart. Then in Exodus 11 it says

9 The LORD had said to Moses, “Pharaoh will refuse to listen to you—so that my wonders may be multiplied in Egypt.” 10 Moses and Aaron performed all these wonders before Pharaoh, but the LORD hardened Pharaoh’s heart, and he would not let the Israelites go out of his country.

God's actions directly result in Pharaoh's stubbornness, according to what God tells Moses this is because he wants his "wonders" to multiply in Egypt. It is clear that God wants to complete this final plague and kill the Egyptian firstborn. This is an act of collateral damage one might expect to see in human conflict, certainly not the work of any loving or good God.

profile image

pjocius 5 years ago

Sorry I cannot disagree with you more on you view of the scriptures.

it's a little too late to find out whe the orginial sin in the garden is.

Certainly wasn't eating an apple. If is was a sin to eat "the apple" it would still be a sin to eat an apple.

Our God is the same yesterday today and forever.

So with that being said..eating an apple today would be partaking within the confines of the 1s the first sin.

Like I said it is not eating an apple.

Do a deeper word search of the word "touch" and you will get the idea what it really was.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago


Of course, it had nothing to do with an apple. The Bible is full of Allegory, Euphemism, Metaphors and Parables.

Like when Yahshua said the bread was his flesh. Most people see clearly that what he said was symbolism, but a lot of the others escape them.

But we CAN know what the sin was, it's very simple. I know what the sin was and if you want, I will tell you how to find out yourself.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

Titen-Sxull God said that at first to a certain people, not to everyone. Later he took it back and said the son would not bear the iniquity of the father nor the father for the son.

So, it is not clearly there. You have to read all of the scripture to know truth

Titen-Sxull profile image

Titen-Sxull 5 years ago from back in the lab again


I have read the entire Bible Deborah. Does the fact that God changed his mind mean he was wrong? I'm aware that the God of the Bible does contradict himself often, especially for a supposedly perfect all powerful being. It certainly contradicts the verse that says he's the same "yesterday, today, and forever.".

So apparently for the Israelites the sins of the Father pass to the son if the son hates Yahweh. According to you that doesn't count anymore... of course it apparently DID count for the First Born of Egypt, and the innocent died for the sins their parents committed, if you believe the story that is.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

Titen-Sxull I don't know why an atheist is reading a hub on sin anyway.

First of all God is God and is very merciful. Because he repented of what he said does not mean he contradicts himself. Your quote about yesterday, today, and forever, was one made by Paul, not God. God can and will change his mind when he needs to. When God makes a covenant and the other party doesn't uphold the agreement then God doesn't have to.

It's great you have read the bible. Now it's time to understand it.

Titen-Sxull profile image

Titen-Sxull 5 years ago from back in the lab again

A link to one of Disappearinghead's hubs was left on one of mine so I gave it a look and liked what I saw.

Well if he's repenting than he must have done something wrong, which throws the idea of him being perfect out the door. So God is allowed to break his promises as long as humans ALSO break theirs? Wow, what high standards to hold a PERFECT being to.

No one understands the entirety of the Bible because it contradicts itself constantly and asks you to believe illogical irrational impossible things without any evidence that they're true.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

Repent doesn't mean he did something wrong. He changed his mind because he had mercy. He is God who gives life. He expects a little something back.

When parents have children or people get married they hope there is love and agreement at least in most situations, why do you expect God to be different? We were created in his image (same attributes) You understand your feelings but not God's. He says he is a jealous God. If you got jealous you would say you have a right to be, or there is nothing wrong about those feelings.

But I am not trying to change your mind about God. I was discussing sin.

Titen-Sxull profile image

Titen-Sxull 5 years ago from back in the lab again

God gave life? To whom?

The analogy to parents is a bit puzzling. My parents gave me life, not God. They cared for me, not God. God is not similar to a loving Father, his most common reaction in the Bible is to kill or punish, especially in the Old Testament. Guess he was an abusive Father back then and had a change of heart?

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

Funny the things people read into what someone writes.

I never said anything about God or your parents giving your life to you.

I said God gives life in general.

I said parents want their children to love them and agree with them in most things

Titen-Sxull profile image

Titen-Sxull 5 years ago from back in the lab again

"I said God gives life in general."

That implies that God is somehow responsible for all life right? Yet there's no evidence for that anywhere in the fossil record or in any biological process ever documented. In order to give God credit for life of any kind shouldn't it first be established that he actually had something to do with it?

karatekidjmt profile image

karatekidjmt 5 years ago

i would agree with this if not for the verses like "There is no one righteous, not even one. they have all turned aside. Together they have all become worthless." and "the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked. who can know it?" and other verses like that.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

Karatekidjmt if you read that in Psalms, it is talking about a fool. It goes on to say that God IS IN the generation of the righteous.

And if you are reading Paul's words, he has combined about 6 different verses from several places.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

In Romans 3 Paul said it is written and quotes what is suppose to be in scripture but it's not. One line is like in Psalms chapter 14 & 53

Romans 3

10.As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

11.There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.

12.They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

You won't find anywhere it says

"There is none righteous, no, not one"

profile image

L.K.kirui 5 years ago

Two questions emerge

1Adam and eve were given the tree of life freely. Had they eaten from it, they could have been immortal! After they sinned they were not allowed to eat from it any more. So if a man is born blameless, then where is the tree of life and of knowledge of evil and good to choose from? Why does a curse come to a newborn?

2what does it make a man inclined to sinning? Does it not show that God's creation is imperfect hense God is also imperfect?where is this nature coming from? Why are we not like angels? Why do we have to suffer and die? Are we realy to be blamed? No! We act as we act because we are as we are. Poor humans!

Porshadoxus profile image

Porshadoxus 5 years ago from the straight and narrow way

If we (all mankind) did not inherit sin, why did Jesus have to die for my (and your) sin. You walk a dangerous path, my friend, clearly in line with Postmodern and emergent church thinking. If you cannot believe that you are a sinner, and that Jesus' death and resurrection accomplished propitiation and reconciliation, then you are not saved. Your eternity will be in hell.

And to stifle the response, I am not judging you. I am reporting to you what the Bible tells me.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 5 years ago

Porshadoxus, before you go around representing the voice of God, you need to have studied for many years and get the true meaning of scripture. Do you know how different the Hebrew bible is from the English one? Many don't even understand that one (English).

Teaching false doctrine is not always what someone intends to do, but saying the meaning is this or that, if it isn't true, it's teaching false doctrine

We are not born sinners. People make themselves sinners, and everyone has the choice to stop sinning. Saying that everyone sins is not only untrue, it also tells me that YOU sin.

Post some scripture you want to question, and I'll teach you.

Matthew 15:9

But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

profile image

stevehay 5 years ago

Enjoyed reading , thanks DH.

Must remember this man's name, saw a vid on Youtube of a wonderful man, Father Somebody, disagreeing with Original Sin asking "What about Original Innocence?"

And in relation to Roman's 5:19, where is it in Scripture where God says he will save a city from destruction if He can be shown ten righteous men in that place? Sodom and Gommorrah, was it? That reminded me of how the "obedience of one can make all righteous".

My take on this is that the righteous being is a higher or enlightened being. His/Her influence on those in sin (separated from God)is not directly by his/her own hand but by the Grace or Flow of God through them, which can enter the spirit of others who are living a spiritual death and then they can receive life. And possibly just ten people like this in each city has so far kept us from destroying ourselves.

DavePrice profile image

DavePrice 5 years ago from Sugar Grove, Ill

The Eastern Orthodox view is that man was created perfect but not yet matured, which illuminates a different aspect to the events in the garden. Man failed to mature to his potential. This lessens the legal emphasis of the Western view, and subsequently changes the idea from penal substitution to Christus Victus - in simple terms, western "salvation" is a term rejected for "vocation" - man failed to perform his vocation, which was a perfect union with God, Christ restored man's ability to accomplish his vocation, thus supplying the means - through His sacrifice and by the Holy Spirit - for man to return to the state of the Garden. Its a fascinating difference that finds little comment in the Western world.

Clif 5 years ago

@Deborah. I like what you have written. I've been looking into this topic for some time and been unable to find anyone who could give a good biblical argument against original sin. I've read a lot on the arguments for it and found them less than clear or logical.

A couple of questions for you or disappearinghead. Are you saying then that the consequences of Adam's disobedience (sin) was death to all mankind? Is that the only consequence?

Second, if there is no original sin, then does that mean someone today could conceivably live a perfect life without ever sinning and thus not need the atonement that Jesus did?

By the way, this is not a challenge to you; I am genuinely seeking some answers and this is the first site I've found where this kind of discussion is going on. And like I said, I found your discussion very on target.

Thanks for your input.

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 5 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Thanks Dave, that is certainly a very different view point and puts a whole different spin on the state of man; one that is considerably less condemning.

Hi Cliff. I think that death was the result to Adam of his sin, and because the Tree of Life was now off-limits to humanity, we all die because there is no longer access to it; whatever the tree was.

I think it conceivably possible that someone could live a perfect life apart from sin. Unfortunately as we are social animals that learn by imitating behavior, it is only a matter of time before everyone does sin.

Clif 5 years ago

Thanks for your answer Disappearinghead. If death was the only consequence to Adam and Eve's disobedience, and a human could technically live a sinless life, then would that person need Jesus?

profile image

Rad Man 4 years ago

If you look at the apple as being knowledge or a critically thinking mind it begins to make sense. Ignorance is bliss. It's simply a story to illustrate what will happen if you question the bible. Look at it critically and see it for what it is and the world becomes a cruel place. But you at least see the world for what it is.

brittvan22 profile image

brittvan22 4 years ago from Atlanta, Georgia

Great insight, you sound a bit like you might be a correlationalist and a semi-Pelagian. Great argument!

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 4 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Thanks brittvan22, though I don't know what a correlationist or a semi-pelagian are :)

brittvan22 profile image

brittvan22 4 years ago from Atlanta, Georgia

Pelagianist was a staunch theologian that was in firm opposition to original sin. Original sin was coin by another theologian Augustine. He says humankind was a slave to Concupiscence. We were helpless to it. Pelagian was not in agreement and said babies are not evil, etc. When they are old enough, they do sin, but they do not come into to the world as sinners. Correlationist on the other hand, apply scripture through their express. They utilize other things such as science, philosophy, psychology, etc to understanding scripture, they begin at the experience. Their opposition is orthodox who believe you begin with the bible and affirm original sin.

brittvan22 profile image

brittvan22 4 years ago from Atlanta, Georgia

Most people that hold a strong doctrine of original sin, have a lowly opinion of people and hold tight to the Grace to forgive them for whatever they do. I do not knock Grace, but I believe in Free Will that we have the ability to sin or not.

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 4 years ago from Wales, UK Author

Thanks again Brittvan22, I guess i'm a Pelaggianist and a Correlationist then.

brittvan22 profile image

brittvan22 4 years ago from Atlanta, Georgia

Lol, it's not a bad, I am a semi-pelagianist and a correlationist as well. I'm thinkin of hubbing on the exegetical process in biblical study, because so many people iegete (use scriptures out of context).

Ivan 4 years ago

What do you do with Psalm 51:5? Thanks.

- Ivan

busillis22 profile image

busillis22 4 years ago

Interesting thoughts. You have done some very good and careful exegesis here.

I think an interesting perspective you might want to consider is the way Athanasius deals with inherited sin. He doesn't do it quite in an Augustinian way. He assumes a necessary connection between death and sin. The fact that we are destined to die is itself an ontological reality in which our sinfulness is found.

anonymous 4 years ago

The concept of Original Sin is cruel unfair and unjust. Having Adam and Eves sin transmitted to all future unborn humans is unjust and cursing and punishing the entire creationwith diseases violence killing mass starvation mosquitoes ticks tooth decay birth defects centipedes venomous snakes venomous spiders tapeworms hurricanes tsunamis intense cold intense heat mental illness physical ugliness and loneliness is extremely cruel and unjust. Punishing animals is extremely cruel and unjust. This God of the Bible has no common sense and has no reasoning and does not know how to forgive. Monstrous inhuman cruelty negligence incompetence stupidity irrationality insanity and destructiveness are His ways. This cruel unjust unreasoning God has ruined and flushed the entire creation down the toilet for Adam and Eves sin. Its beyond stupid. Its beyond insane. This God has abdicated the world to the Devil. This God is negligent and an absentee landlord. Its an embarrassment for me as a Christian. What a dunce we have for a God. No one has total free will. Nature and nurture also dictates and determines our behaviour whether for good or evil. If Adam and Eves sin really corrupted and ruined our nature and if human nature is prone to sin and depravity because of this then how in blazes could we have total free will? We dont have total free will. We have partial free will. And if one adds the Devil and demons as influencing and corrupting humans then that leaves less room for free will. Whether we have total free will or whether we have partial free will it is insane immoral cruel and stupid to allow eons of evil sin suffering and death. Free will does not justify ruining and flushing the entire creation down the toilet and does not justify turning the world into a horror movie. Not in my book. The God of the Bible is a ruthless unreasoning unjust unkind cruel monster. Hes irrational insane and stupid. Eldritch Abomination describes this God. This homicidal genocidal egomaniacal tyrannical God only cares about us loving Him and worshipping Him and keeping His commandments and accepting Jesus. So screw everything else. It doesn't matter how horrible our lives are and it doesn't matter how much we suffer to this God. He expects all of us to live like religious fanatics like Jesus which is total denial abstinence privation deprivation poverty misery servitude blind faith blind trust martyrdom. How many people want to live like this? Pluck out your eyes cut off your hands and suffer and die for Jesus since this earthly life isn't important. So why bother doing anything that distracts us from this egomaniacal God? This God expects us all to have our undivided attention devotion love obedience and worship and expects us all to deprive ourselves of all worldly needs and desires and expects us to suffer snd die like Jesus. This egomaniacal selfish self centered God is out of touch with His creatures and out of touch with reality. He is irrational and unreasoning unkind ruthless unjust. This God is cruel to both people and animals. Animals have suffered and died for millions of years and this God allows it. This God is a lousy caretaker and an absentee landlord. This God is going to throw billions of people in an eternal torture chamber in hell. Eternal fire. Being roasted like charcoals forever. Its sick sadistic diabolic fiendish malevolent monstrous inhuman cruelty beyond imagining. This God has abdicated the world to the Devil. The world is a hellhole and a horror movie. I live in fear

Porshadoxus profile image

Porshadoxus 3 years ago from the straight and narrow way

Romans 5

profile image

Wesley Steinbrink 3 years ago

I would like to address Ivan's question about Psalm 51:5

( can click on the Hebrew tab also)

"Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me."NASB Notice that it does not say "Behold, I was brought forth with iniquity, And with sin my mother conceived me." The Hebrew word for with is not in there - עם There is a big difference. We are all born into a sinful world.

Now since I am not a Hebrew scholar, I also include this link that expounds on the above verses and Psalms 51:5 The person "Messianic Drew" has the take that it is hyperbole as many of the Psalms are.

karatekidjmt profile image

karatekidjmt 3 years ago

If everyone is born without being tainted, then why do we all choose and gravitate towards sin? Why do you not have to teach a child how to lie, steal, and be selfish? With your first several passages, you attempt to show that we are responsible for only our own sin. That is correct. That does not mean that we are not born with a tendency toward sin. You then try to use Cain as an example. All that God is telling Cain is that he can do what he wants. We sin because we want to sin. We are slaves to our desires. Whatever we want to do the very most, that we will do. (Jonathan Edwards on the Freedom of the Will). Then you try to explain away Romans 5:12 without even dealing with key phrase "all sinned" which is central to the whole interpretation. "All sinned" because they were representatives of the entire human race. They made the choice for us, and its prideful to assume that you would have made a better one (in fact, since you don't believe in original sin and you yet sin, that much is clear). You say that Christians would not say that Romans 5:19 speaks of "auto- inherited righteouesness" but that is exactly what many christians believe. Read Romans 5 and you'll see that there are 2 representatives. Christ and Adam. Adam led everyone he represented (mankind) into sin, Christ led everyone he represented (the church, elect, christians etc) into righteouesness through justification based on his righteousness. So it was auto inherited becaues we were chosed before the foundation of the world Ephesians 2, not according to our works Romans 9.

Also since you are obviously not a greek scholar (or taught by one) you fail to see the literary methods involved in the text of Romans 5 because you are reading it in english apart from knowledge of the Greek.

newenglandsun 3 years ago

"Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve disobeyed God and ate from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. According to the much of the Church, this first sin has corrupted the entire human race since. Like some kind of disease, the sin is hereditary, their sin is now our sin; everyone is born into a general state of sinfulness."

It's more accurate to say that the ancestral sin corrupted the human race into a state where they maintained selfishness.

It's a state we are born into. We did not inherit the fault that Adam and Eve did. If a mother punches her womb while she is carrying, the baby will be mush.

Disappearinghead profile image

Disappearinghead 3 years ago from Wales, UK Author

How does Adam & Eve's sins affect our genes, what are the genetic processes? Did God knit faulty people together in the womb or does he only make perfect things? Why can't you see that inherited sin is utter nonsense, it makes no logical sense.

gmwilliams profile image

gmwilliams 2 years ago from the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

This is no original sin. The concept was used by religionists to instill fear and to control the masses,bending them to their respective religious ideology. Great hub, voted UP! So sad to see you GO, WHY!

flpalermo profile image

flpalermo 2 years ago

The carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is NOT subject to the Law of God, neither indeed can be. Man was created “incomplete.” He needs the Holy Spirit of God, which was offered by the tree of [eternal] life, not the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Man CHOSE to determine for HIMSELF what is good AND evil, and therefor CHOSE his destiny – spiritual death. His physical death was “appointed” from the very beginning (…for it is appointed for man ONCE to die). The experiment had to do with the will of the mind. Would the spirit of man subject itself voluntarily to its creator and accept “sonship” in the Devine family? Or would man follow “the god of this world” and deny himself the “Glory” that was to be revealed in him? True, inherited sin cannot be a fact since God Himself declared to Cain “ …if you do not do well, SIN LIETH AT THE DOOR and unto you shall be its desire and YOU SHALL RULE OVER IT.” Sin is not inherited. It is a choice!

profile image

Deborah Sexton 2 years ago


You said Quote " Thanks for your answer Disappearinghead. If death was the only consequence to Adam and Eve's disobedience, and a human could technically live a sinless life, then would that person need Jesus?" End Quote

I am sorry I was away for so long

I am Jewish, so I have a different viewpoint but even Yahshua (Jesus) said:

Mark 2:17

When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 2 years ago

Luke 5:32

I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

profile image

Deborah Sexton 2 years ago

Jewish people do not believe in the doctrine of original sin. This is a Christian belief based on Paul’s statement, “Therefore just as through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12). The doctrine was fully developed by the church father, Augustine of Hippo (354-430).

According to this doctrine, hereditary sinfulness is inescapably transmitted to human beings by their parents, starting with Adam and Eve. It is alleged that only acceptance of Jesus as savior from sin can redeem a person from sin. All those who do not accept Jesus as their savior from sin are condemned to eternal suffering in hell.

Whether man is a sinner by nature or not is immaterial. Judaism teaches the biblical way to repentance and reconciliation with God. Sincere repentance in which the sinner pledges to rectify his sinful ways and lead a righteous life is one means that is open at all times to all of humanity (Jonah 3:5-10, Daniel 4:27). God counsels Cain, “Why are you annoyed, and why has your countenance fallen? If you do good [that is, change your ways], will it not be lifted up [that is, you will be forgiven]. But if you do not do good, sin rests at the door; and it desires you, but you may rule over it” (Genesis 4:6-7). God informs Cain that repentance and subsequent forgiveness are always open to him. The remedy for sin is clear. Biblically, God’s loving-kindness depends on right conduct and extends to all humanity.

Remember what the Christian's New Testament says:

Luke 5:32

I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

© Gerald Sigal

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

    Click to Rate This Article