A CRITIQUE OF ST. AUGUSTINE’SVIEW OF ORIGINAL SIN

Jerry S. WaltersSystematic Theology I

Mr. Robert Matz08/12/2010

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THESIS STATEMENT 2

INTRODUCTION 3

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 4

The Fall 5

SIN: ITS CAUSE AND PUNISHMENT 8

SO IS THERE A PURPOSE BEHIND ALL THIS? 12

CONCLUSION 14

BIBLIOGRAPHY 16

1

THESIS STATEMENT

The subject or original sin is a confounding one; especially in light of what the book of Genesis

says was God’s reaction to creation: That he saw it, and it was good. How could something as

bad as sin come out of something that was created good? Augustine’s teaching on the subject of

original sin, although flawed in places, presents a God-exalting view revealing a divine purpose

in allowing that original sin.

2

INTRODUCTION

The curse of sin has plagued man since the temptation of Eve by the serpent in the

Garden of Eden. The topic of sin is an important area of study in the Christian academic

community because of what we who preach the gospel proclaim – in short, that Jesus Christ

came to save sinners. As for “original sin,” the Bible is very clear that it was through Adam that

sin was passed on to the rest of humanity. Important questions are raised by the topic of original

sin. Does one inherit the guilt of Adam even though he or she was never there to participate in

their sin? Why should we suffer punishment brought on by them? Why was it possible for them

to sin in the first place?

Original sin is so called for three reasons. First, the doctrine holds that original sin is

derived from our first parents, Adam and Eve, and passed down to the human race. Second, it

exists in the life of every person from birth, and therefore cannot be regarded as the result of

imitation or environment. Third, it is the inward root of all the actual sins that defile the life of

man.1 The term original sin is used in four different senses: (1) the guilt of the first sin; (2) the

loss of original righteousness; (3) corruption of our whole nature; and (4) an inherited

corruption.2

The subject or original sin is a confounding one; especially in light of what Genesis 1

repeatedly says was God’s reaction to creation: That he saw it, and it was good. How could

something as bad as sin come out of something that was created good? Augustine’s teaching on

the subject of original sin, although flawed in places, presents a God-exalting view revealing a

divine purpose in allowing that original sin.

1 Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology. (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eernmans Publishing Company, 1996), 244.2

S. Lewis Johnson, "G C Berkouwer and the doctrine of original sin," Bibliotheca sacra 132, no. 528 (October 1, 1975): 316-326. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed August 3, 2010), 318.

3

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The doctrine of original sin developed slowly over the first few centuries of church

history. The early church fathers had no definitive doctrine of original sin. The Greek fathers

held that there was a physical corruption derived from Adam. It was a condition, not guilt. Each

person bears the guilt of his own sin, not Adam’s. This cumulated in Pelagianism, which flatly

denied original sin. The Latin Church, especially under Tertullian, regarded “original sin as a

hereditary sinful taint or corruption, which did not exclude the presence of some good in man.”3

It was under the teaching and writings of Augustine that the doctrine came to fuller development.

Anthony Hughes states that the term “original sin” actually originated with Augustine.4

Much of what Augustine taught on the subject or original sin was in reaction to the

teaching of Pelagius. Pelagius was a monk from England who was active in Rome between 400

and 411. He rejected the notion of an ‘original sin.’ He believed all human beings are born

innocent and fall by their own guilt. By free will human beings can also repent and lead a good

life. He only recognized a sinful bent in humanity.5 Pelagius taught that Adam’s sin hurt no one

but Adam. Of course he set a bad example for everyone to follow, but his guilt was not

inherited. Therefore, infants, according to Pelagius, are born in the same state as Adam before

the Fall.6 At birth, one is not inclined toward sin. Any later inclination toward sinful behavior

3 Berkhof, 244; Anthony Hughes, "Ancestral versus original sin: an overview with implications for psychotherapy,"

Journal of Psychology and Christianity 23, no. 3 (September 1, 2004): 271-277. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed August 3, 2010), 271.

4 Hughes, 271.

5 Hans Küng, Great Christian Thinkers ( New York: Continuum, 1994), 83.6

Anthony Fitzpatrick, “Original Sin or Original Sinfulness?” New Blackfriars 90, no. 1028 (July 2009): 458-473. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (Accessed July 27, 2010), 458-459.

4

develops through bad habits and environment.7 Pelagius held that grace was “everywhere and at

every moment.” By grace, “he meant free will, apprehension of God through reason, and the law

of Moses and Jesus’ instruction. Also forgiveness was given to adults in baptism.”8

THE FALL

As to whether the Bible tells of Adam as just a character in a parable, or as a historical

person, Paul clarifies it in Romans 5:12-21 where he refers to the trespass of “one man,” that one

man being Adam. Sin, according to Paul, came into the world through one man. Paul, in 1

Corinthians 15:21-22 and 45 makes it very clear that he is saying that Adam was the first man.9

According to Augustine, Adam was created good and with the ability to not sin. At the same

time, he had the capacity to sin. Adam sinned and fell by his own free choice. Everyone shares

in the punishment as a result of the fall. Specifically, Augustine based his interpretation of

Romans 5:12 on the Old Latin Translation and came to the conclusion that all men share in

Adam’s guilt.10

Where Paul states that all die, the Old Latin translates it as “in quo [Adam] omnes

peccaverunt,” or “in Adam all sinned.”11 Augustine, by his own admission, laments that he

never properly learned Greek and relied mostly on translations from Greek to Latin.12 Most of

7

Millard J, Erickson, Christian Theology, 2nd ed (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1998), 650.8

Erickson, 649.9

Ibid, 500.10

Anthony N. S. Lane, “Lust: the human person as affected by disordered desires,” Evangelical Quarterly 78, no. 1 (January 1, 2006): 21-35. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (Accessed July 27, 2010), 24.11

Ibid.12

Hughes, 273.

5

our modern translations show the last clause in verse 12 to read, “because all sinned” (ESV),

which tends to show that responsibility for sin lies with the sinner, not because of inherited guilt.

Augustine was not original in his thought on Romans 5:12. Lane points out that Augustine’s

interpretation “goes back at least as far as Irenaeus and which he probably learned from

Ambrose.13 Erickson points out that Augustine’s view on this text is not totally preposterous.

The final clause in verse 12 tells us we were involved in some way in Adam’s sin. All parts of

us – physical and spiritual, material and immaterial – were received from out parents all the way

back to our first parents. “On that basis, we were actually present within Adam, so that we all

sinned in his act.”14

What caused Adam to fall? After all, Augustine taught that man was created good. It

seems completely irrational for Adam to have committed that first sin. His every need was met.

He walked in communion with God. He was placed in charge of everything that was given

dominion over everything. “For God, the author of natures, not vices, created man upright; but

man, being of his own will corrupted, and justly condemned, begot corrupted and condemned

children.”15 It appears that something caused Adam to begin to hold love for his wife over love

for God. Barbara Pitkin points out that Eve actually believed what the serpent said. Her

temptation was more intellectual. She had an honest desire for knowledge. Adam’s sin,

however, was more affective. He knew what the serpent said was false but was motivated by

love for his wife, rather than duty to God.16 Augustine suggests that the serpent chose to speak to

13 Lane, 24.14

Erickson, 653.15

Augustine, City of God, Book 13, Chapter 14 (Old Landmark Publishing, 2005), Amazon Kindle e-book, 9250-54.

16 Barbara Pitkin, "Nothing But Concupiscence : Calvin's Understanding of Sin and the Via Augustini." Calvin

Theological Journal 34, no. 2 (November 1, 1999): 347-369. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials,

6

the woman first and not the man because she was the weaker part of the human alliance, and he

would not have been so easily deceived. Adam, however, could not bear to be apart from his

companion even though it meant being a partner in sin.17 Fitzpatrick points out that Augustine

seems to recognize the problem of why someone created good would sin in the first place and

shifts focus from Adam to the devil.18 However this does not explain why sin occurred in the

first place. It only says that Satan sinned and fell before Adam.

Just as man’s first sin seems completely irrational, so did that of Satan. It made no sense

for Lucifer to rebel against God knowing his power and majesty. It makes no sense that he

continues in his treachery in that he knows God will prevail in the end.19 Lucifer was created the

highest of all God’s angels. Scripture suggests he was placed in charge of the earth when it was

originally created. That power inflated his pride, and when man was given dominion over the

earth, jealousy welled up in Satan, and man became the object of his hatred.20 In his anger he

determined that he would set his throne above the stars of God and become like the Most High.21

So jealous was he of man, who had been created and immediately placed in charge of a renewed

earth, that he tempted man to sin (Genesis 3:1-6), and sin and death thereby entered the human

race.22

EBSCOhost (accessed July 27, 2010).

17 Augustine, Book 14, Chapter 11, 9930-43.18

Fitzpatrick, 462.19

Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 493.20

Merrill Frederick Unger, "The Old Testament revelation of the beginning of sin," Bibliotheca sacra 114, no. 456 (October 1, 1957): 326-333. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed August 3, 2010), 327.21

Isaiah 14:12-14.22

Unger, 332.

7

Fitzpatrick shows that Augustine claimed that the angels who did not fall were kept

because they received help from God. The ones who did fall had a lapse of the will because they

did not have the help from God.23 “These angels therefore, either received less of the grace of

the divine love than those who persevered in the same; or if both were created equally good,

then, while the one fell by their evil will, the others were more abundantly assisted, and attained

to that pitch of blessedness at which they became certain they should never fall from it.”24 There

really is no way we can tell for sure if this was the case. It is difficult to reconcile the facts that

God is good and that God allowed there to be sin and evil in the world. There are works of God

that remain a mystery, and everything he does or allows works into his divine plan. As Paul

declares in 1 Corinthians 13:12, “For how we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I

know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.” While man is

confounded, God never is.

SIN: ITS CAUSE AND PUNISHMENT

God did not sin, nor is he to be blamed for sin (Deuteronomy 32:4; Genesis 18:25; Job

34:10; James 1:13), however it would be wrong to suggest there is a dualism, declaring there to

be another eternal being who is responsible for introducing evil power into creation. So God by

allowing sin to occur, he ordained it even though he did not delight in it.25 God created all things

and brought them into being. There is no evil being that brought evil things into being. “God is

responsible for the origin of everything.”26

23 Fitzpatrick, 46324

Augustine, 8,629-35.25

Grudem, 492.26

Erickson, 397.

8

It was stated earlier that the ultimate reason of sin remains a mystery. Thomas Aquinas

offers another explanation. “Everything that causes sin is not necessarily sin, so there is no need

of an endless series of sins; there can be a first sin whose cause is not another sin.”27 This could

be a desire which in and of itself is harmless but gives way to idolatry (first sin) which paves the

way for all sins that follow. “When man by one sinful act loses grace or charity or shame or

anything else that withdraws him from sin, he more readily falls into other sins so that the first

sin is the indirect cause of the second. But when one sin disposes a man to commit another

similar sin the causality is direct, for acts cause dispositions and habits including the acts.”28 The

cause of sin, therefore is the human will unregulated by right reason or divine laws. Evil is not

the cause of sin, according to Aquinas, but instead sin is caused by the absence of some other

good.29

Augustine offers a similar explanation. In City of God and the Literal Commentary on

Genesis, Augustine “argues with reference to Ecclesiasties 10:13 that the root of the first sin was

pride, so that an evil will preceded the transgressive act.”30 Although later theologians offer a

variety of motivations (internal and external) for the fall, they generally attribute pride as the

ultimate cause of the first sin.31 Adam and Eve were approached by the devil in the form of the

serpent because they had begun to live for themselves. The false offer, “You will be like God”

(Genesis 3:5) was too much for them to overcome by their own will. As the proverb said, “Pride

goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18).

27 Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 141.

28 Ibid, 139/29

Ibid, 131.30

Pitkin, 349; Augustine, 9958-63.31

Pitkin, 350.

9

Augustine is quiet clear in saying that humanity suffers consequences that are the result

of original sin. “For the corruption of the body, which weighs down the soul, is not the cause but

the punishment of the first sin; and it was not the corruptible flesh that made the soul sinful, but

the sinful soul that made the flesh corruptible.”32 Augustine declared that we are presently

burdened by our corruptible bodies, but we will one day be freed of this body just as Paul had

declared in 2 Corinthians 5:1-4.33 Specifically, Augustine interpreted the corruption of our flesh

to be concupiscence, a term not used much outside of theological communication, but which

essentially means lust. Sexual lust is the most powerful type of concupiscence.34

According to Hans Küng, Augustine’s connection of the transmission of original sin with

concupiscence was due to his personal experience of the power of sex in his Manichaean past.

As Augustine experienced conversion, he came to feel that the punishment for sin was sexual

shame coupled with an uncontrollable sexual drive.35 This is a difficult doctrine to follow. It

was seemingly a lust for power that brought about the fall of Satan. It was the lust for

knowledge and power that brought about the Fall of Adam. According to Augustine, however,

lust is the punishment for original sin, not the cause. This resembles the quandary presented by

the question, “Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” “Augustine’s contradiction lies in this:

he attempts to argue that what he should designate as a consequence of original sin, namely

human pride and the distortion of the human will, is in fact the initiator and cause of the first

sin.”36

32 Augustine, Book XIV, Ch. 3, 9653-58.33

Ibid, 9641-52.34

Lane, 25.35

Küng, 86.36

Fitzpatrick, 463.

10

Another consequence of sin, as taught by Augustine, is death. He held that humans

would not have been subjected to death if not for the consequence of their first sin.37 Augustine,

as well as many others since him, draws from Genesis 2:17 to support this view of death as a

consequence of sin. Fitzpatrick is not so sure of Augustine’s interpretation of this text and

claims that death is not so much punishment as it is a natural part of life. He claims this belief

was much the same in Old Testament times. In Genesis 25:8 is recorded that “Abraham breathed

his last and died in a good old age.” In Genesis 35:29, “Isaac breathed his last, and he died and

was gathered to his people, old and full of days.”38

Anthony Hughes questions whether there was any punishment at all as a result of the

Fall. “In [Eastern] Orthodox thought,” he says, “God did not threaten Adam and Eve with

punishment nor was He angered or offender by their sin. He was moved to compassion. The

expulsion from the Garden and from the Tree of Life was an act of love and not vengeance so

that humanity would not become immortal in sin.”39

Augustine remains hopeful even through his doctrine of death being the punishment for

sin. He declares that one day the resurrected saints will “inhabit those very bodies in which they

have here toiled, but in such sort that neither shall any corruption of unwieldiness be suffered to

attach to their flesh, nor any grief or trouble to cloud their felicity.”40

Perhaps the most disagreeable of Augustine’s teaching on original sin is his view that

humans come into the world with the stain of original sin, and without something further even

infants who have never actually had the chance to commit any sin will be damned to hell.

37 Augustine, Book 13, Ch. 19, 9366-72.38

Fitzpatrick, 466-467.39

Hughes, 27240

Augustine, Book 13, Ch. 19, 9388-94.

11

Augustine believed that only by baptism would even a newborn child be set free from the

consequences of original sin.41 Blaise Pascal’s though on this subject most likely reflects that of

most people.

What could be more contrary to the rules of our miserable justice than eternal damnation of a child, incapable of will, for an act in which he seems to have so little part that it was actually committed 6000 years before he existed? Certainly nothing jolts us more rudely than this doctrine, and yet, but for this mystery, the most incomprehensible of all, we remain incomprehensible to ourselves.42

Erickson differs in his view on the death of infants. He argues that there are many biblical texts

which show evidence that God does not view those who die so young as under condemnation.43

Jesus tells his disciples that unless they become like children, they will not enter the kingdom of

heaven (Matt. 18:3; 19:14). King David agonized over the death of his newborn child, but

looked forward to the day when he would see him again (2 Samuel 12:23).

SO IS THERE A PURPOSE BEHIND ALL THIS?

We’ve seen earlier that God was not powerless against the evil and sin that came to exist

in the world. Although he did not desire for Adam and Eve to sin against him, he allowed it

despite being all-powerful and able to prevent it. God created mankind and gave them free will.

He could have prevented the whole thing by depriving us of free will, however that was not his

plan. It was no surprise to God that some of his angels would rebel. All things were created by

and for Christ (Col. 1:16), even the angels who would become demons. Even they will one day

be used to glorify God. “Immediately after the fall, God revealed both Satan’s and humanity’s

41 Küng, 86; Fitzpatrick, 470.42

Blaise Pascal, Pensées, trans. A. J. Krailsheimer (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1966), p65; quoted in Johnson, 319. 43

Erickson, 654-655.

12

roles in God’s redemptive plan.”44 “Then Lord God said to the serpent, ‘Because you have done

this, cursed are you above all livestock and above all beasts of the field; on your belly you shall

go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. I will put enmity between you and the

woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall

bruise his heel’” (Gen. 3:14-15). This first hint of the gospel reveals that God knew that his Son,

Eve’s biological offspring, would be the one to defeat Satan, the one who introduced sin to the

world.

Permitting something to occur is an indirect cause. Yet God does not sin despite having

permitted sin to occur. As Proverbs 16:4 suggests, all things serve to glorify Jesus ultimately.45

How will Christ by glorified? He will be glorified by two groups of people. Augustine describes

the first.

And evil is removed, not by removing any nature, or part of a nature, which had been introduced by the evil, but by healing and correcting that which had been vitiated and depraved. The will, therefore, is then truly free, when it is not the slave of vices and sins. Such was it given us by God; and this being lost by its own fault, can only be restored to Him who was able at first to give it. And therefore the truth says, If the son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed; which is equivalent to saying, If the Son shall save you, ye shall be saved indeed. For He is our Liberator, inasmuch as He is our savior.46

Jesus will be glorified by those who are saved. Millions will fall on their knees in praise of Jesus

Christ for the sacrifice He made setting them free of the eternal consequences of their sin. While

Christians may admit guilt now, the true extent of guilt against an infinitely pure God will not be

realized until we stand before God, which will be the catalyst of eternal praise and worship. As

it is now, we cannot see how bad we really are. As Merrill Unger puts it, “Light appearing

44 Randy Alcorn, If God is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil (Colorado Springs: Multinomah Books, 2009), 49-50.45

John Piper, Spectacular Sins and their Global Purpose in the Glory of Christ (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008), 55.46

Augustine, Book 14, Ch. 11, 9915-24.

13

against the background of darkness would be more resplendent. Holiness shining out against the

somberness of sin would be more attractive. The majesty of the major key would be more

pronounced by contrast with the minor note. A smile would radiate all the more beautifully

through the tears.”47 As the first answer in the Westminster Catechism says, “Man’s chief and

highest end is to glorify God, and fully enjoy him forever.” Nothing will inspire this more than

gratitude each person feels in light of the true depravity of sin when compared with an infinitely

holy God, who exhibits grace in so many ways including the forgiveness of sin.

CONCLUSION

There is no doubt that the doctrine of original sin leaves some questions unanswered.

This has not kept many great thinkers since the time of Christ from endeavoring to reach a

definite answer as to exactly what God was thinking when he allowed sin to enter creation, or

whether he had any control at all. Augustine, Bishop of Hippo, was one such man who devoted

his life to the study of God and became the first to crystallize a formal doctrine of original sin,

one which although flawed, still held Christ as supreme.

Through Augustine’s teaching we can see that something brought about by Adam’s sin

has been passed to every man and woman who followed, except for Jesus. No man is able to

choose not to sin, outside of the grace of God in Christ. God could have halted sin before the

ages began, but for his divine plan, he allowed it. He also knew, before the ages began, he would

give the ultimate sacrifice in his son. In this, he so worked to gain the glory of mankind for

himself.

47 Unger, 326.

14

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alcorn, Randy. If God is Good: Faith in the Midst of Suffering and Evil. Colorado Springs: Multinomah Books, 2009.

Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae, Vol. 25, Sin, trans. John Fearon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Augustine. City of God. Old Landmark Publishing, 2005. Amazon Kindle e-book.

15

Berkhof, Louis. Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eernmans Publishing Company, 1996.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology, 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1998.

Fitzpatrick, Joseph. “Original Sin or Original Sinfulness?” New Blackfriars 90, no. 1028 (July 2009): 458-473. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (Accessed July 27, 2010).

Grudem, Wayne. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994.

Hughes, Antony. "Ancestral versus original sin: an overview with implications for psychotherapy." Journal of Psychology and Christianity 23, no. 3 (September 1, 2004): 271-277. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed August 3, 2010).

Johnson, S Lewis. "G C Berkouwer and the doctrine of original sin." Bibliotheca sacra 132, no. 528 (October 1, 1975): 316-326. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed August 3, 2010).

Kelsey, David H. "Whatever Happened to the Doctrine of Sin." Theology Today 50, no. 2 (July 1, 1993): 169-178. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed August 3, 2010).

Küng, Hans. Great Christian Thinkers. New York: Continuum, 1994.

Lane, Anthony N. S. “Lust: the human person as affected by disordered desires.” Evangelical Quarterly 78, no. 1 (January 1, 2006): 21-35. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (Accessed July 27, 2010).

Piper, John. Spectacular Sins and their Global Purpose in the Glory of Christ. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008.

Pitkin, Barbara. "Nothing But Concupiscence : Calvin's Understanding of Sin and the Via Augustini." Calvin Theological Journal 34, no. 2 (November 1, 1999): 347-369. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed July 27, 2010).

Unger, Merrill Frederick. "The Old Testament revelation of the beginning of sin." Bibliotheca sacra 114, no. 456 (October 1, 1957): 326-333. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed August 3, 2010).

16