Systematic Theology, by Louis Berkhof - New Leaven

such thing as original sin. Children are born in a state of neutrality, beginning exactly
where Adam began, except that they are handicapped by the evil examples which they
see round about them. Their future course must be determined by their own free choice.
The universality of sin is admitted, because all experience testifies to it. It is due to
imitation and to the habit of sinning that is gradually formed. Strictly speaking, there
are, on the Pelagian standpoint, no sinners, but only separate sinful acts. This makes a
religious conception of the history of the race utterly impossible.
2. OBJECTIONS TO THE PELAGIAN VIEW. There are several weighty objections to the
Pelagian view of sin, of which the following are the most important:
a. The fundamental position that man is held responsible by God only for what he is
able to do, is absolutely contrary to the testimony of conscience and to the Word of God.
It is an undeniable fact that, as a man increases in sin, his ability to do good decreases.
He becomes in an ever greater measure the slave of sin. According to the theory under
consideration this would also involve a lessening of his responsibility. But this is
equivalent to saying that sin itself gradually redeems its victims by relieving them of
their responsibility. The more sinful a man, the less responsible he is. Against this
position conscience registers a loud protest. Paul does not say that the hardened sinners,
which he describes in Rom. 1:18-32 were virtually without responsibility, but regards
them as worthy of death. Jesus said of the wicked Jews who gloried in their freedom,
but manifested their extreme wickedness by seeking to kill Him, that they were bond-
servants of sin, did not understand His speech, because they could not hear His word,
and would die in their sins, John 8:21,22,34,43. Though slaves of sin, they were yet
responsible.
b. To deny that man has by nature a moral character, is simply bringing him down
to the level of the animal. According to this view everything in the life of man that is not
a conscious choice of the will, is deprived of all moral quality. But the consciousness of
men in general testifies to the fact that the contrast between good and evil also applies
to man’s tendencies, desires, moods, and affections, and that these also have a moral
character. In Pelagianism sin and virtue are reduced to superficial appendages of man,
in no way connected with his inner life. That the estimate of Scripture is quite different
appears from the following passages: Jer. 17:9; Ps. 51:6,10; Matt. 15:19; Jas. 4:1,2.
c. A choice of the will that is in no way determined by man’s character, is not only
psychologically unthinkable, but also ethically worthless. If a good deed of man simply
happens to fall out as it does, and no reason can be given why it did not turn out to be
the opposite, in other words, if the deed is not an expression of man’s character, it lacks
257