Are Men Born Sinners? - Library of Theology

Strong admits quite frankly that he is not completely satisfied with the theories of original
sin. He says:
We must grant that no one, even of these later theories, is wholly satisfactory. We hope,
however, to show that the last of them the Augustinian theory, the theory of Adam's
natural headship, the theory that Adam and his descendants are naturally and organically
one explains the largest number of facts, is least open to objections, and is most accordant
with Scripture.
The fact is that the irresistible convictions of justice in the hearts of all men reject the
teachings of the doctrine of original sin. Consider the following:
1. If Eph. 2:3, "By nature the children of wrath," means born with a sinful nature and
under the wrath of God because of that nature which the advocates of the doctrine of
original sin teach then it follows that every child who dies in infancy goes to hell where
he must forever suffer the awful punishment and wrath of God.
But Christians will not accept this. I have not found a Christian yet who will accept that
babies who die go to hell. But this text, which they themselves use to prove original sin,
could not help but teach that babies who die go to hell where they will suffer God's wrath
in never-ending punishment. If babies really are born "by nature the children of wrath,"
then they must go to hell if they die in such a state. But why is it that Christians cannot
accept that babies who die go to hell? Because they know it would be a monstrous and
cruel injustice to send innocent little babies to hell. And, of course, they are right. God
would never send innocent little babies to hell. However, this is what Eph. 2:3 necessarily
teaches if it teaches the doctrine of original sin. This problem with Eph. 2:3 points up
once again the insurmountable problem with original sin, which is that it conflicts with
our God-given convictions of justice, making God unjust.
2. If Psalm 51:5, "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive
me," means that even unborn children in their mother's womb are sinners, then it follows
that all the multiplied millions of children who have been aborted, along with all
stillbirths, are in hell where they will suffer its torments throughout all eternity for "their
part" in the sin of Adam.
3. If Heb. 7:9-10, "Levi...paid tithes in Abraham, for he was yet in the loins of his father,
when Melchisedec met him" means that in Adam all mankind sinned because they were
in his loins when he transgressed, which is the teaching of the advocates of original sin,
then it follows that the Lord Jesus Christ also sinned in Adam. This is a blasphemous
thought, which no Christian can allow, but something that would have to be true if all of
human nature was corrupted in Adam when he sinned.
But if this theory is true, then we might suppose that there will be myriads of souls who
will never be born, but who nevertheless existed as seed in the loins of Adam, and who
will go to hell because they sinned in Adam, even though they never will be born! Why
not! Is this so astonishing? If the advocates of original sin can believe that all of humanity