The question of whether human beings are born sinners is an important theological debate within Christianity. There are various perspectives on this issue based on different interpretations of biblical passages. At the core of this debate is the doctrine of original sin – the idea that humans inherit a sinful nature from Adam and Eve’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden. Let’s take a deeper look at what the Bible says about this controversial topic.
The Biblical Basis for Original Sin
The doctrinal concept of original sin is primarily based on Genesis 2-3, Romans 5:12-21, Psalm 51:5, Job 14:4, and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22. According to Genesis 3, after Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, sin entered the human condition. God punishes them, recognizing that humanity is now flawed with a tendency towards evil. The Apostle Paul expands on this in Romans 5:12, saying “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned.” This verse forms the basis for the belief that all people since Adam and Eve have inherited their original or ancestral sin.
Further support comes from Psalm 51:5 which states “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.” This implies humans are sinful from birth. Other verses like Job 14:4 (“Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?”) and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 (“For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive”) reinforce this concept of human depravity originating from Adam’s transgression.
The Inherited Sin Nature View
One prominent viewpoint is that while humans are not necessarily guilty of Adam’s sin, they do inherit his corrupted sinful nature. Supporters of this inherited sinful nature perspective point to Ephesians 2:3 which describes people as “by nature children of wrath.” The argument is that while we are not accountable for Adam’s sin, we are born with his corrupted human nature which predisposes us to evil. As Psalm 58:3 states, “The wicked go astray from the womb; they err from their birth, speaking lies.” Inherited depravity is passed down generationally according to this position.
Advocates of this theology such as St. Augustine, John Calvin, and modern Reform traditions believe that due to the Fall, humans have an inherent tendency towards evil that separates them from God. They maintain that left in this natural state, humans cannot achieve salvation without God’s grace. This is why Jesus Christ’s atonement is necessary for redemption. Overall, this view holds that while humans are not guilty of Adam’s disobedience, they innately possess his corrupted sin nature at birth.
The Pelagian “Sinless Infant” View
In contrast to the idea of inherited sinful nature is the Pelagian or “sinless infant” perspective. Followers of Pelagius in the 5th century argued that humans are born essentially tabula rasa or morally neutral. Babies are sinless at birth and only become sinful later in life through their own free choices rather than inheriting Adamic sin. As Ezekiel 18:20 states, “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son.” Pelagians believed this meant people are only accountable for their own sins.
Contemporary proponents of this view include Charles Finney and other revivalists who rejected the doctrine of original sin. They cite verses like Matthew 18:3 where Jesus says “unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” For Pelagians, this and other such verses confirm that little children are innocent until they mature and choose to sin. Overall, this perspective holds that we are born free of inherent corruption and only turn sinful through the exercise of individual free will later in life.
The Realism View of Transmitted Sin
A third perspective called Realism, developed by the Scholastics, attempts to find middle ground between the inherited sin nature and Pelagian views. According to Realism, when Adam sinned it inflicted human nature with the loss of original righteousness and holiness. However, they argue humans do not inherit Adam’s guilty act itself but only the consequences of his sin. We are not accountable for Adam’s disobedience but still suffer corruption.
Thomas Aquinas argued that this original sin is transmitted through natural generation, not imitation. Therefore, while we are not morally responsible for Adam’s guilty act, human nature still bears the defects of the Fall in the form of concupiscence (lust, desire), spiritual death, disease, and bodily defects. Humans still have an innate tendency towards sin, even if they are not culpable for Adam’s transgression. So Realism agrees with the doctrine of original sin but views it slightly differently than the inherited sin nature view.
The Federal Headship Perspective
The concept of federal headship provides another angle on original sin. Scripture teaches that Adam acted as the covenant head of the entire human race. His sin affects us because God appointed Adam as the representative of all humanity. Therefore, when Adam sinned, we sinned “in him” collectively. Verses like 1 Corinthians 15:22 support this: “For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive.” Adam’s disobedience is imputed to us because of the federal headship principle.
John Murray explained that in the same way Christ’s righteousness is imputed to believers for justification, Adam’s sin is imputed to humanity for condemnation. Because of our union and identification with Adam as our covenant head, his original sin is rightly ours. The federal headship view agrees with the inherited corruption perspective but adds this covenant theology layer to explain how humanity shares in Adam’s transgression. His failure as our representative before God plunged the whole race into guilt and depravity.
The Augustinian-Reformed View
The Augustinian-Reformed view combines aspects of the inherited corruption and federal headship perspectives. Prominent advocates like Augustine, Calvin, Luther and Reformed theology hold that humans both inherit Adam’s sinful nature and are counted guilty in him as their federal representative. The corrupt nature Adam incurred deprives us of original righteousness and conveys inherent condemnation. Also, the guilt of his first disobedience to God is imputed to all his progeny as our covenantal head.
Therefore, the Augustinian-Reformed doctrine affirms we are born deprived of righteousness with a corrupted nature inclined toward evil, and we are also forensically guilty along with Adam as covenantal parties in his original sin. Unlike Pelagianism, this doctrine recognizes the biblical testimony to inherited depravity and federal headship. Humans enter life guilty, condemned, and corrupt – unable to save themselves apart from God’s sovereign grace in Christ.
Different Perspectives on Inherited Guilt
Within the broad Augustinian-Reformed view, there are some nuances in how theologians characterize inherited guilt. Some distinguish between immediate imputation (I.I.) and mediate imputation (M.I.) of Adam’s sin. I.I. means we are held directly guilty for Adam’s act while M.I. means we inherit a corrupt nature from Adam that in itself constitutes guilt before God. Hodge advocated I.I. while Turretin held to M.I. but saw them as complementary.
Others like Shedd viewed Adam’s sin as the sufficient cause or ground for God to condemn the race, but distinguish between inherited corruption of nature and imputation of guilt. They argue we are not strictly accountable for Adam’s act itself but still inherit his sinful condition. In general though, the Reformed view holds humanity shares in the dual penalties of inherited depravity and guilt from their covenant head’s disobedience.
Objections to the Doctrine of Original Sin
Despite its biblical rationale, original sin has been criticized by some theologians. Objections include: 1) It is unjust for God to consider people guilty for a sin they did not personally commit. 2) The doctrine undermines human free will and moral accountability. 3) It presents a pessimistic view of human nature. 4) It implies Jesus Christ himself may have inherited original sin from his human ancestry.
In response, defenders note divine justice is based on God’s righteousness, not our limited human understanding and sentiments. Also, original sin does not obviate free will. Humans are still volitional moral agents even if their will is corrupted by sinful nature. Additionally, rather than being pessimistic, recognizing indwelling sin allows us to depend on Christ’s redemption. Finally, Jesus did not inherit original sin since he was miraculously conceived by the Holy Spirit, not through natural generation.
What are the Implications?
This debate has profound implications for our view of human identity and salvation. If humans are born morally neutral as Pelagianism teaches, they have no need for divine grace and are capable of justifying themselves through works. In contrast, the doctrine of original sin holds that we enter the world inheriting both the corrupted nature and imputed guilt of Adam. We are helpless sinners from birth who cannot save ourselves by our own effort. We desperately need the atoning work of Christ to redeem us from the curse of original sin.
Understanding humanity’s inborn sinful tendency should produce humility and point us toward relying on God’s mercy. The universality of original sin also puts all people on equal footing – no one is inherently righteous, regardless of merit or status. In the end, inherited depravity should convict us of our need for supernatural regeneration and motivate heartfelt gratitude for God’s gracious, forgiving love toward hopelessly sinful people.
In summary, the doctrine of original sin teaches that all human beings, except Christ, are born with a corrupted sinful nature and are imputed with guilt in Adam. The precise nature and transmission of original sin is debated, but Scripture presents a consistent testimony that we inherit this moral corruption from birth. This empowers the redemptive message that Jesus Christ came to rescue helpless, condemned sinners unable to save themselves. The universal problem points to Christ as the singular solution.