Original Sin and Optional Choice
Are we simply pawns in God’s hand – waiting to be placed – waiting to be positioned on the checkered board? We look down and grip onto His grasp – praying that His desire will match our desire. His hands release and we’re scattered across the chess board – without reason, without cause and without thought. Is this God’s plan? Is His sovereignty something that is swayed by whim?
As I delved into the pages of Christian Theology, I couldn’t help but grapple with the McGrath’s view of God and humanity. Early on in the text, McGrath highlights Patristic Theologians and centers on the Augustine vs. Pelagian controversy. The author summarizes the debate of grace and states, “According to Augustine, it follows human beings are now contaminated by sin from the moment of their birth. In contrast to those twentieth-century existentialist philosophers which affirm that “fallenness” is an option which we choose (rather than something which is chosen for us).”[1] Did all the Patristic Theologians hold to the view of predestination and original sin? Certainly not. However, in hopes of creating a contrast with Pelagian philosophy, McGrath has formed a biased perception of Christianity and its early foundation.
Millard Erickson, penned a great argument to Augustine’s view of original sin when he wrote, “Sin is the choice of the person who commits it. The desire to do what is done may be present naturally, and there may be external inducement as well. But the individual is ultimately responsible. Adam and Eve chose to act upon an impulse and suggestion; Jesus chose not to.”[2] Whether we inherited a sinful nature or we inherited the propensity to sin, the real separation of God and humanity rests on choice – choice of sin and choice of salvation. In McGrath’s attempt to compare and contrast Augustine to Pelagius, He made the assertion that predestination must be correlated with Christian thought. What about those who lean more towards the Arminian stance? Are they to be categorized as heretics, or at least sympathetic to Pelagianism?
Martin Luther fought against Pelagian theology and he fought from an Armenian standpoint. “The first period of the Reformation is dominated by the personal agenda of Martin Luther. Convinced that the church had lapsed into an unwitting Pelagianism, Luther developed his distinctive doctrine of justification by faith alone.”[3] Luther and Wesley both sought to eradicate heresy that decorated the churches during that time period. They both differed in many ways from Calvin and Augustine, but they all stood on the same team.
The Enlightenment sought to bring an element of rationalism within theological study; however, the discussion expanded from original sin to the identity of Christ, the problem of evil, the trinity and the question of miracles. Pelagianism was revived, but wore a different mask. Voltaire and Rousseau criticized the doctrine of original sin by stating, “The doctrine is encouraging pessimism with regard to human abilities, thus impeding human social and political development, and encouraging laissez-faire attitudes.”[4] Were they right? Was it impeding on humanity’s understanding of self-actualization? If one believes that we are all born with original sin, then one must also surmise that we are all without choice. “For Augustine, humanity has no control over its sinfulness. It is something which contaminates life from birth, and dominates life thereafter.”[5] If there is not control for sin, then how can one be responsible for actions that are not under their own control? Would this belief not force God’s hand into manipulation? However, the same is true with Pelagianism. The strict belief that man is the only one who has choice, removes the need for one to choose God. Therefore, man becomes higher than God’s sovereignty. God becomes unnecessary.
As I read through the text, I realized that one’s theological opinions are dictated by one’s theological foundation. Karl Barth adheres to the theology of universal salvation. His view of predestination is painted by his perspective of inclusivity of humanity. He asserts that the only one who experiences God’s wrath and separation is Jesus; therefore, humanity has full access and full attainment to God without fear of hell. “Barth’s doctrine of predestination points to the universal restoration and salvation of humanity – a position which has occurred a degree of criticism from others who would otherwise be sympathetic to his general position.”[6] All of our theological viewpoints are tainted by our own personal bias. Augustine’s stance of predestination stemmed from his perspective of original sin. Pelagius’ stance of original sin stemmed from his perspective of earned merited favor with God. Karl Barth’s stance of universal restoration, stemmed from his perspective of God’s wrath towards Christ. All of these foundations color theological conclusions. As I read through this week’s assignment, I delved into the pages searching for answers; however, I found myself with more questions than answers. Perhaps, theology is not only a quest for truth, but an exercise that strips away the fallacies of our own belief in light of truth.
[1] Alister McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011) 19.
[2] Millard J, Erikson, Christian Theology: (Baker Academic, 1998,) 616.
[3] Alister McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011) 60.
[4] Alister McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011) 69.
[5] Alister McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011) 352.
[6] Alister McGrath, Christian Theology: An Introduction (Wiley-Blackwell, 2011) 370.
About the Author
Colleen Batchelder
I speak at conferences, churches, companies and colleges on intergenerational communication, marketing, branding your vision and living authentically in a ‘filtered’ world. My talks are customized to venue needs and audience interests. My passion is to speak with organizations and bridge the intergenerational gap. I consult with companies, individuals, churches and nonprofit organizations and help them create teams that function from a place of communication that bridges the generational gap. I’m also the Founder and President of LOUD Summit – a young adult organization that presents workshops, seminars and summits that encourage, empower and equip millennials to live out their destiny and walk in their purpose. When I’m not studying for my DMin in Leadership and Global Perspectives at Portland Seminary, you can find me enjoying a nice Chai Latte, exploring NYC or traveling to a new and exotic destination.9 responses to “Original Sin and Optional Choice”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Thank Colleen for a great blog, filled with supportive and historical event and useful data, you made an interesting point. Yes, it is true “Our theological viewpoints are tainted by our own personal bias.” You proved the point quiet well in this statement “All of these foundations color theological conclusions”
There are many people, live by the old adage All human know edge, understanding, and interpretation arise from the biases and pre-understandings we bring to bear on the evidence. Understanding is not achieved in a vacuum. Nobody is neutral in their approach to the world—preunderstandings are always at work. But as Christians, we must keep God at forefront and hear “truth”. Sometime truth is tainted by philosophy and lost within. In the history of Christian theology, philosophy has sometime been seen as a natural complement to theological reflection, whereas at other practitioners of the two disciplines have regarded each other as mortal enemies.
Thanks! Rose Maria
Thank you, Rose!
You brought up a great point. Many of us allow our perspectives to be colored by our culture or background; however, as new creatures in Christ, we have a new culture that invades our mind, heart and actions. It’s imperative that we not only renew our mind, but also rededicate our mind to the truth of Christ. Many of us who have been raised in the church, continue to see Christ though the eyes of tradition or denominational viewpoint. This can serve as a good starting point, but then we stay on the milk, instead of graduating to the meat. My church background includes, Baptist to Pentecostal, but my Christian foundation has always been steeped in biblical theology through personal study. I’m a theological mutt. I don’t adhere to a certain denomination, but adhere to a biblical understanding of Christology, Soteriology and Eschatology. McGrath’s views differed from mine at times, but the essentials of his faith were the same. I think philosophy offers us the ability to hear the voice of culture and give an answer for the hope that is within us. Both disciplines allow us to enter into a conversation with Christ and community and bridge the gap between the mind and heart.
Colleen,
Great Blog. Great insight. You stated: “theology is not only a quest for truth, but an exercise that strips away the fallacies of our own belief in light of truth.” What was a truth or fallacy that you found as a result of this weeks reading?
Aaron
Thank you, Aaron. Good question!
Truth can be pluralistic in presentation, without being pluralistic in foundation. Christian Theology is not simply a dogma of dos and don’ts – it’s a deluge of ideas, perspectives and thoughts that go beyond denominational norms. It’s a personal question posed to each of us. We have the responsibility and privilege of understanding our own theology. McGrath discussed the basics of the Pelagianism, yet he failed to dissect the whole and break it into parts. If you delve into the theology mindset of Pelagius, you’ll find that some of his views are held by respected Christian theologians. The fullness of his stance is secular, but the surface concepts can be associated with Christian denominational views. For instance, original sin is not necessarily a popular view by all Christian churches; however, it is the majority perspective. Many theologians adhere to the idea that we were born with a propensity to choose sin. This is more common among those who lean towards human free will.
Theology evolves. It is not stagnant. As we continue with our walk with Christ, it should evoke questions and cause us to reevaluate our denominational norms based in light of biblical truth. Ravi Zacharias summed up this well when he stated, “I do not believe that we will ever be able to understand the depth of our own questions until we first understand ourselves, the questioners” (Has Christianity Failed you?, 27). Theology should continuously lead us to question and continuously lead us to Christ.
Hey Colleen. You are a great thinker! Thanks for this. I like your conclusion that maybe this isn’t all about discovery of truth, but an exercise to strip away our own fallacies. Besides reading textbooks like this, are there other ways one can engage in that exercise?
Thank you, Aaron. Great question!
There are so many ways to engage with various theological viewpoints. Alister McGrath actually has some wonderful videos on YouTube that highlight his discussion with Dawkins and others who differ in faith and values. I tend to look towards cultural philosophy in the form of websites, webzines and lectures that highlight various views. I would also suggest balancing statistical research and reading with secular and Christian perspectives. There are also lots of philosophical and theological societies that send you scholarly publications. I would also recommend visiting various churches or religious places that hold different belief systems and making an appointment with the leadership to discuss the similarities and differences of your theological viewpoints. Here’s a list of a few suggestions below. Happy hunting!
1. Video of McGrath and Dawkins:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vt95KHe6hUU
2. Webzines and Websites for cultural philosophy:
http://www.relevantmagazine.com/
http://consciousmagazine.co/
http://www.philosophersmag.com/
3. Societies:
http://www.epsociety.org/
http://www.etsjets.org/
It seems to me that the gold standard for theology would be Erickson. That book has been referenced back to multiple times throughout this books discussion. I do remember his writing to be very inclusive but he did have his subjects that he brought his opinion to the forefront.
Interesting how still today, one man’s thoughts bounce off another man’s thoughts or ideas and helps to form the theology of today. I think that is the really cool thing about all of the higher learning. What is the greatest thing that all of these theology books have brought in your life? What has been the most freeing and the most troubling?
Kevin
Colleen:
I agree on several layers with your blog. As far as McGrath versus Erickson, it would depend what you are looking to find? These two authors approach theology from different perspectives.
You read deeper into McGrath, which I appreciate. McGrath is a reference writer who seems to be quite open with his theological prowess.
My question would be, will you continue to keep McGrath as a reference book or would you go straight to Erickson?
Phil
Coleen,
Welcome to the world of frustrating theology! We want answers and we come out with more questions! I believe that the essence of this process was well captured in your closing words: “Perhaps, theology is not only a quest for truth, but an exercise that strips away the fallacies of our own belief in light of truth.”
It is an interesting discovery to realize that a lot of what we consider a matter of fact is actually a matter of opinion. Yet, that is not to say that everything is a matter of opinion. That’s where good theological reflection distinguishes between what is essential and what is not essential Christian doctrine. The book “Who Needs Theology” addressed this point as well.
If you are interested in reading the actual writings of the church fathers and other theologians throughout church history, there’s a nice book to add to your collection. It is called “Readings in the History of Christian Theology” (Vol. 1 and 2). It is like a shorter version of McGrath’s book, with shorter summaries but with lots of quotes from the actual people involved in the theological issues of the time. I think you would enjoy it.