Are Men Born Sinners? - Library of Theology
Are Men Born Sinners? - Library of Theology
Are Men Born Sinners? - Library of Theology
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
commanded the sun and not the earth to stand still? That the sun runs from one end <strong>of</strong> the<br />
heavens to the other?<br />
So while Martin Luther and Calvin both rejected many <strong>of</strong> the errors <strong>of</strong> the Catholic<br />
Church, they also both still clung to some <strong>of</strong> its errors. Why? Because <strong>of</strong> their ignorance.<br />
Both Calvin and Martin Luther were completely ignorant about astronomy. They did not<br />
think they were ignorant. They pr<strong>of</strong>essed to know much more about it than Copernicus.<br />
They thought that their false views were true because they were supported by long-held<br />
tradition, and they could quote Scripture texts to support them. And Christians today also<br />
think that the doctrine <strong>of</strong> original sin is true because it is supported by long-held tradition,<br />
and they can quote pro<strong>of</strong>-texts from the Bible to prove it. Because <strong>of</strong> their ignorance,<br />
they will stand with righteous indignation against those who declare the dogma <strong>of</strong><br />
original sin to be false, just like Calvin and Luther, because <strong>of</strong> their ignorance, stood with<br />
righteous indignation against the truth as taught by Copernicus.<br />
There is grave ignorance among Christians respecting the doctrine <strong>of</strong> original sin. Most<br />
Christians would have to admit that they are completely ignorant about the following<br />
facts:<br />
1. That the doctrine <strong>of</strong> original sin is a historical doctrine. It became a doctrine <strong>of</strong> the<br />
Catholic Church in the 5th century A.D.<br />
2. That it has evolved as a doctrine and that it had its roots in a heathen philosophy.<br />
3. That it is really only a theory, and further, that there is not one, but several<br />
contradicting theories <strong>of</strong> original sin.<br />
4. That there is grave disagreement among the theologians who support the different<br />
theories <strong>of</strong> original sin, and that they are all able to prove each other's theories to be false.<br />
5. That, although the doctrine <strong>of</strong> original sin was foisted on the church by Augustine,<br />
much <strong>of</strong> the credit for the acceptance <strong>of</strong> the doctrine must go to the changing winds <strong>of</strong><br />
church politics and power. Not only the doctrine <strong>of</strong> original sin, but several other<br />
doctrines <strong>of</strong> the church see-sawed back and forth in their acceptance or rejection<br />
according to the caprices <strong>of</strong> politics, power, and influence <strong>of</strong> the state and church.<br />
6. Most Christians are ignorant <strong>of</strong> the fact that Pelagius and Celestus were inadvertently a<br />
great help to Augustine in foisting his doctrine <strong>of</strong> original sin on the church. In fact,<br />
without their role, it may never have taken hold in the church. Pelagius and Celestus<br />
withstood Augustine's views on original sin, natural inability, and a necessitated will. But<br />
in rejecting original sin, they had to teach that infants are without sin, which meant that<br />
there was no need <strong>of</strong> infant baptism. Churchmen at that time were strongly prejudiced for<br />
infant baptism, so the implication involved in a denial <strong>of</strong> original sin (that there was no<br />
need for infant baptism) shocked them, raising opposition to the teachings <strong>of</strong> Pelagius<br />
and Celestus and making Augustine's doctrine <strong>of</strong> original sin, natural inability, a