Recently, philosopher and theologian William Lane Craig responded to a question asked by a Muslim reader about the doctrine of original sin. The Muslim reader was obviously struggling to understand the doctrine. In the beginning of his response, Craig writes:
"...the doctrine that the sin of Adam is imputed to all men is far from universally held among Christians and so is not essential to Christianity. The doctrine is also weakly attested biblically, so that personally I remain quite open-minded about it. In short, you don’t have to accept this doctrine in order to become a Christian, so you shouldn’t let it be an obstacle for you."1
I encourage readers to checkout Craig's entire response here.
So, what do you think of Craig's response? Do you agree with him? Is the doctrine of original sin "not essential to Christianity?" Whether you agree or disagree, please feel free to sound off in the comments below!
Courage and Godspeed,
Chad
Footnote:
1. William Lane Craig, Q and A: Original Sin, Oct. 22, 2017.
Related Posts
Share Your Thoughts: Do We Really Live in a Postmodern Culture?
Share Your Thoughts: A Reader on God and Presidential Candidates
Comments
I listened to several of his Defenders (2) classes and he took alot of time going through this in his Doctrine of Man Series (listened to parts of sessions 10-15).
His statement at the end of session 15 summarizes his view of original sin-
"So it seems to me that this classical Augustinian doctrine is defensible, I think, in certain respects if we modify it, and that it does make good sense out of Romans 5. However, these views that I’ve expressed are not held with great dogmatic certainty or tenacity. I think we have to recognize that the basis for this doctrine is this one passage basically in Scripture and that this passage might be differently interpreted by others. But nevertheless given the commitment of the historic Christian church – both Catholic and Reformation – to this doctrine, I think it is one that we would give up very reluctantly. It would only be if there were really compelling reasons to abandon the doctrine of original sin that we would read Romans 5 otherwise. Otherwise, I want to stay within the mainstream of Christian thinking, at least in the West on this issue, and affirm an Augustinian view of original sin.[10]"
When you look at the Greek behind Romans 5, there is a lot of "wiggle room" for how these words can be rendered. Yet if the NASB is correct in verse 12, look at the last three words in this passage
"12 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).
"...because all sinned..." is incompatible with the notion of "Original sin" -- it would be absurd to say that if one meant "...because Adam sinned...".
I think this is an issue worth discussing, because countless people reject Christianity due to their distaste for what appears to be uncritical acceptance of an apparent injustice. When wedded to Calvinist nonsense, the whole thing gets even more bitter.