Scan barcode
kevin_shepherd's review against another edition
4.0
Original Sin: The view which holds that the sin which caused Adam’s fall and expulsion from paradise is transmitted from generation to generation, so that all descendants of Adam must be regarded as being of a ‘perverted’ or ‘depraved’ nature. -MLK Jr.
To say that original sin comes verbatim from Old Testament scripture is a falsity that is widely promulgated. In fact, the word ‘sin’ is nowhere to be found in the biblical accountings of Adam and Eve. The punishments for disobedience were childbirth pain and patriarchy for Eve [Genesis 3:16] and sweat and toil for Adam [Genesis 3:23]. True, they were both expelled from the garden [Genesis 3:23-24], but there is no mention of any trans-generational retribution. None. Nada. Nope.
“The idea of original sin arose from centuries of discussion and debate on the meaning of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, rather than from any literal reading of scripture. The challenge for early Christians was to explain in what sense Christ was a universal savior: from what, exactly, did everyone need to be saved?” (pg 199)
Part of the answer, James Boyce proposes, was provided by Saint Paul. Paul saw Jesus as something of a “New Adam,” a second chance at righting that horrible, horrible wrong (eating a piece of fruit). But, even though Paul suggested that the crucifixion was to put right the fractured Man/God relationship, “he never wrote that all humans had inherited the sin of Adam and faced the wrath and judgment of God because of this.”
So the question is this, did a decision to disobey God some six thousand years ago really result in a dogmatically sinful inheritance of which you and I (and every other human being on the planet) are carriers? If you find that question perplexing then you are in good company.
Boyce’s accounting of the evolution of Original Sin, from Saint Augustine to Thomas Aquinas to Martin Luther to John Calvin to Thomas Hobbs to John Wesley to Billy Graham, is surprisingly extensive for such a short book. He even dedicates large portions of his analysis to heretical detractors like Charles Darwin (chapter 18), Sigmund Freud (chapter 19), and Richard Dawkins (chapter 21).
This is a book I would recommend to saints and sinners alike. It is occasionally irreverent but remarkably cerebral and genuinely respectful.
To say that original sin comes verbatim from Old Testament scripture is a falsity that is widely promulgated. In fact, the word ‘sin’ is nowhere to be found in the biblical accountings of Adam and Eve. The punishments for disobedience were childbirth pain and patriarchy for Eve [Genesis 3:16] and sweat and toil for Adam [Genesis 3:23]. True, they were both expelled from the garden [Genesis 3:23-24], but there is no mention of any trans-generational retribution. None. Nada. Nope.
“The idea of original sin arose from centuries of discussion and debate on the meaning of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, rather than from any literal reading of scripture. The challenge for early Christians was to explain in what sense Christ was a universal savior: from what, exactly, did everyone need to be saved?” (pg 199)
Part of the answer, James Boyce proposes, was provided by Saint Paul. Paul saw Jesus as something of a “New Adam,” a second chance at righting that horrible, horrible wrong (eating a piece of fruit). But, even though Paul suggested that the crucifixion was to put right the fractured Man/God relationship, “he never wrote that all humans had inherited the sin of Adam and faced the wrath and judgment of God because of this.”
So the question is this, did a decision to disobey God some six thousand years ago really result in a dogmatically sinful inheritance of which you and I (and every other human being on the planet) are carriers? If you find that question perplexing then you are in good company.
Boyce’s accounting of the evolution of Original Sin, from Saint Augustine to Thomas Aquinas to Martin Luther to John Calvin to Thomas Hobbs to John Wesley to Billy Graham, is surprisingly extensive for such a short book. He even dedicates large portions of his analysis to heretical detractors like Charles Darwin (chapter 18), Sigmund Freud (chapter 19), and Richard Dawkins (chapter 21).
This is a book I would recommend to saints and sinners alike. It is occasionally irreverent but remarkably cerebral and genuinely respectful.
More...