Not “original sin, ” only “evil inclination”

[Originally posted in 2014.—Admin1]

Image from www.myartprints.com/
Image: Lucas Cranach the Elder – Fall of Man and release of the man

If you have not disabused your mind about Christianity’s teaching that every baby born in this world is tainted with hand-me-down “original sin” from the first parents, please check out these posts preliminary to reading this article:

For a thorough discussion from the Jewish perspective, this article explains not only why the doctrine of original sin is questionable but goes further on how New Testament writers specifically Paul and Matthew have either misquoted or deliberately omitted phrases from the original Hebrew texts:

http://www.outreachjudaism.org/articles/original-sin.html

——————————————-

Imagine yourself parent of a firstborn. You want to teach this child everything he needs to know about rules to observe in your family/home. He fails to obey the one and only rule (a test for obedience, mind you) for which he was punished — by never being able to approach you ever again!

Then you had another child. Without this 2nd child being told the exact same rules you instructed your first son, nevertheless you treated this 2nd son the same way as your first, not because this 2nd son failed, but because your first son failed. And you do the same to your 3rd as well as 4th child and so on.

Sound ridiculous? Absolutely! How does that behavior and judgment reflect on you as a parent? You appear unthinking, unfair, and do not deserve to have children! Never mind you, how would your children feel about where they stand with one another? Your eldest son would forever regret ever having made a mistake with consequences not only for himself but for his siblings. His siblings, one after another, learning of their eldest brother’s mistake and punishment being unfairly applied to them would be resentful of their brother as well as of you for not giving them the chance to show you that perhaps they would have behaved differently, after learning from the deprivation their eldest brother experienced. They love you but they have to live at a distance from ‘unapproachable’ you. And they grow up with that childhood experience forever etched in their mind and soul, and it affects their own relationship with others, specifically their children. They either end up being like you, or swear they will never be like you and hopefully treat their children differently from the way you did. If they chose to be different then the ‘curse’ is broken immediately in the 2nd generation.

Is this a preposterous analogy? Not really, that is basically what the doctrine of original sin is about. Is it fair to conclude that the all wise and all just God would impose something as unreasonable as that toward all humanity? Of course not! Surely some thinking people have already thought how irrational that doctrine is and most likely left the religion they have inherited from their parents and perhaps even became atheist because of it.

Man-made doctrines taught in religions has that effect on thinking people, you know, except they (the ones who think outside of the religious box) are usually looked upon as deluded instead of rational, unsaved by the Christian savior-messiah and destined for Christian hell.

As Catholics, we had never questioned that we all were born with “original sin” even if we silently thought how unfair it was that we never had a chance when we had not even made our first choice to obey or disobey. As babies, we were tainted with it, and thanks to our Catholic parents, we were subjected to water baptism so that the ritual, according to the priest’s teaching and our parents acceptance of it, we as babies would be immediately cleansed of that original sin and start out pure, make our own choices as we grow up. And every time we sin, we can run to the confessional and tell the priest what we did wrong so we could be absolved of each ‘venial’ or ‘mortal’ sin, but not without following the prescribed prayer or action to make up for it. Depending on the religious orientation of the priest, we either got off easy by being told to recite “3 Hail Marys” and “1 Our Father” or worse, the whole rosary. Sometimes we were told to donate to charity, that was easy, just give up our day’s allowance and we were back to being ‘good’, enough to receive holy communion, till the next ‘sin’.

Evangelical Christianity had a slightly different perspective on original sin. One would have to be consciously seeking God and sorry for sins after reaching the age of responsibility and understanding. Believing in Jesus as Savior, being cleansed of original sin as a result of that belief, and submitting to water baptism as a symbol of being “saved” and being part of the “body of Christ” (Christianity, or a particular church or fellowship) makes the “believer” identifiable as a “Christian” as in ‘saved’ by the sacrifice and blood of Jesus Christ.

The New Testament is full of scriptural support for the doctrine of original sin. If that part of the Christian Bible is ALL that one manages to read (and that is the norm for most Christians), then one never discovers what was the original teaching in the “Old” Testament.

If anyone manages to read OT, even in Christian translations, he would discover many verses that would or should make him rethink many Christian teachings, and particularly “original sin.” But unfortunately, most Christians hardly venture into seriously studying that part of their Christian bible; even bible teachers and pastors barely truly understand it and go there only when they need a “prooftext” to bolster some NT “truth”.

If the ‘Old Testament’ is foundational to the ‘New’ so much so it was added as a prequel, then why are most Christians so ignorant of its basic teachings on the OT God and His instructions for all mankind? And for those who do take the time and trouble to read through the OT, why is it that they don’t awaken to its truths? Christian scholars and translators have poured over those scriptures, as have many seminary students required to study them to qualify as pastors or missionaries. So why do they miss understanding that there is no such thing as ‘original sin’ taught anywhere in OT?

The answer is: Christians read their bible in reverse.

Every prospective convert is led first to the Gospel of John which cements basic doctrines in the mind of the new believer. It’s like being given spiritual eyeglasses programmed to make one see ONLY what Christianity wants one to see, so that even when you finally get to OT, all you see is what is taught for you to see. The OT itself has been programmed to fit NT teaching instead of the other way around. Everything becomes so clear, prophecy and fulfillment, all fit together so perfectly, thus claim the Christian Scriptures.

The articles on this website are intended to help you read through verses in the Torah of YHWH, and in the rest of the Hebrew Scriptures that will help you rethink your position on “original sin” as well as many other doctrines you might have swallowed without question, just like we Sinaites did for over half a century of our Christ-centered religious life.

The God of Truth has spoken clearly since His revelation on Sinai; we need only to seriously take His declaration as the only “gospel truth.” Is every person born after Adam and Eve tainted with ‘original sin’? What is your conclusion, dear reader?

In behalf of Sinai 6000 Core Community,

Source: Exodus/Shemoth 24 – "the sight of the Glory of YHVH (was) like a consuming fire" -- We gentiles living in this 21st century are able to experience that climactic moment [God appearing on Sinai] by reading and studying this portion of the TORAH. Indeed, we see YHWH not quite as dramatically as the mixed multitude did, but perhaps even better through these accounts recorded in Exodus. There is a saying that hindsight is 20/20 vision, i.e., we begin to see and understand the question marks in our past only later in our lives, as we mature and hopefully become wiser and more introspective about the meaning or seeming meaninglessness of happenings in history, whether personal, national, or universal. Søren Kierkegaard adds a twist to this: “Only 20:20 vision is hindsight. Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.” As we endeavor to understand each portion in the TORAH of YHWH, much of it will seem irrelevant to our current situation but if we see beyond the time-bound cultural and religious situations and begin to understand what truly has not change—human nature and the Great Revelator who designed the perfect blueprint for living in peace, happily and contentedly with family, community, country and the nations, the unquestionable conclusion is: TORAH is relevant to ALL humankind, not just to Israel, to this very day.

Join the Conversation... Cancel reply