ARTICLE LXVI.

History of the Doctrine of Original Sin.

From C. G. Bretschneider's Manual of Dogmatic History.

TRANSLATED FROM THE GERMAN, BY PROF, H. COWLES.

SINCE Gen. 3: contains nothing respecting the origin of entailed sin, it should not surprise us that no part of the Old Testament makes any use of this chapter, and that it speaks only in general of the sinfulness of man without any particular explanations of the subject.

Morcover death is presented throughout the Old Testament as occurring in the course of nature and not as a consequence of Adam's sin. First during the exile the Jews began to reflect upon the origin of moral evil, and to find historically the source of sin and death in Gen. 3. Probably their reflections on this subject were prompted by the teachings of Zoroaster.*

Yet were their opinions not more remarkable for being few, than for being harmonious. Sirach does not indeed deny the sinfulness of men, (chap. 8: 5,) yet he knows nothing of original sin, but believes that men are not born morally ruined, (chap. 10: 18, 19, & 51: 13) and holds to free will, (chap. 15: 14-17.) The fall he passes over, (chap. 18: 1,) in

* The doctrine of Zoroaster concerning the fall, bears some resemblance to the Mosaic account, yet differs from it very widely. According to Zoroaster, heaven was pledged to the first human pair on condition that they persevered in virtue, and would not worship any demons. At first, they were virtuous; but Ahriman (Satan,) caused a demon to suggest to them evil thoughts, as e. g. whether himself was not the Creator of the world. Through their belief of this lie, the first pair became like Ahriman, wicked and wretched. They went out to hunt and found a white goat whose milk they ate and found it very stimula ting, but it was a poison to their bodies. The demon now gave them fruits which they ate and thereby lost a hundred fold of blessings and reduced them. selves to a single one.

Immortality, Zoroaster does not ascribe to the first pair. Of original sin and its punishment, death, he says nothing.

[Note.-Zoroaster, the celebrated reformer of the doctrines and worship of the Magi, flourished among the Medes probably from B. C. 650 to 600. His writ ings are comprised in the Zendavesta.-Tr.]

total silence, and regards death, (chap. 17: 1,2,) as something original and natural.

On the other hand there appears in his book another view of this subject according to which the beginning of sin and of death are derived from Eve;* a proof that opinions on this point among the Jews were various. Proof of this may be seen also in the manner in which Philo and Josephust understood the Mosaic passages.

The author of the Book of Wisdom also recognizes no inherited sinfulness, originating from the sin of Adam. He does indeed mention the fall of Adam, chap. 10: 1, and af firms, chap. 2: 23. ff, that death originated through envy of the devil; but he understands by the term death, not the death of the body, but the eternal death of the soul.

We have morcover no ground to regard the doctrine of the imputation of Adam's sin as the common doctrine of the Jews before the time of Christ, and therefore to explain Rom. 5: 12. ff, accordingly; for although this doctrine may be found at an older period in the writings of some of the Rabbies, yet it does not follow with certainty that Paul already had it.‡

On this point also, opinions in the most ancient christian Church were not very harmonious or settled, and yet some points were held by the church with sufficient firmness. Origen says expressly that the church taught that every human soul has free-will so as to choose either good or evil, but that the church doctrine did not determine whether the soul is propagated by the course of natural generation, or what its mode of coming into existence may be. This view is con

*Chap. 25: 24. "From the woman is the beginning of sin, and through her (or it,) we all die." These words obviously look towards Gen. 3, but it remains uncertain in what way Sirach derived sin from Eve's transgression, and whether the original Greek words, translated, through her, or through it, refer to "Eve," or to "Sin." The former is more probable.

+ Josephus knows nothing of original sin, but on the contrary affirms that the posterity of Seth were in the highest degree virtuous and wise by nature. He derives from the fall not even one evil affecting the whole race, and attributes to man before the fall only this, that God had pledged to him a happy and long life, wholly free from evil.

Wetstein in his commentary on Rom. 5: 12. ff, has quoted a multitude of Rabbinnic passages to show that all men have sinned in Adam and therefore must die; but these passages do not prove all they are adduced to prove, and are for the most part too recent to be used in explaining Rom. 5, 12. ff. To prove this to be the sense of the passage it must be shown that the term "sin," as used by Paul denotes universal sin-guiltiness, which sense of the term, however, is forbidden by the expressions," sin entered the world," "sin is not imputed," "not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression," and "where sin hath abounded,'' &c.

firmed by the writings of the oldest christian teachers, which contain nothing about Augustine's original sin and its propagation. Hence John Damascenus (died A. D. 760) does not reckon this among the doctrines held by the Church.

With the same harmony of sentiment the oldest church fathers ascribe to man freedom of will in the exercise of which he can choose either good or evil; and it should be especially noted that they ascribe this to him, not as he may perhaps have been before the fall, but as he is still,* and that they find herein the ground of the occurrence of sin, inasmuch as they distinctly notice the fact that God is hereby vindicated from all blame in view of the occurrence of sin in the race.

Hence they know absolutely nothing of the dogma that man is born contaminated with a deadly original sin and is obnoxious to damnation by reason of his very nature; but on the contrary they represent new-born infants as pure, guiltless, and pleasing to God.f

*The passages on this point are superfluously abundant. See Recognitions of Clement of Rome, III. 23, V. 8, IX. 30. "For no other reason does God punish the sinner either in the present or future world, except because He knows that the sinner was able to conquer but neglected to gain the victory."

Justin Martyr in his Apology to the Roman Senate, page 71, represents it as impious to deny the freedom of the will. He recognizes the fact that without freedom there could be no retribution, in a passage where he says-" If the hu man race have not the power by free choice to fly from the base and to choose for themselves the noble and the good, then are they guiltless of their own deeds however done. But that they can of free choice either walk uprightly or barely wrong, we show thus."

Origen, in a passage in his commentary on Romans chap. 3, in which he applies the term "law" used by Paul, to the moral law of the reason, and illustrates the waking up of the consciousness of law in developed minds, says, "Now they are under the law who are passing the period cf life in which they already have the power of discerning moral good and evil. Surely God has giv. en to man all those sensibilities and powers of voluntary action, which are requisite in order to strive successfully for virtue, and has moreover added the faculty of reason, whereby he may know what he ought to do and what avoid. These qualities, accordingly, God is found to have given in common to all men. But if man, having received these endowments, shall neglect to walk in the way of virtue-man to whom nothing has been wanting from God-then will he be found to be wanting himself in the use of those faculties which have been given him by God."

+Shepherd of Hermas, Book 2d, command 2; "Have simplicity of heart and thou shalt be innocent; and be as the infant who knows nothing of that malice, which destroys human happiness."

The same author, Book 2, similitude 29, in a passage which describes the mountain of the blest, says-" The twelfth mountain which gleams in brightness is the abode of those who have believed as pure infants do, whose sensibility no sin has ever reached, nor do they know what sin is, but they have always continued in purity. Men of such a character without any doubt shall dwell in the kingdom of God. For all infants are held in honor before the Lord and hold the first rank."

In respect to the fall of Adam, all the early fathers did not indeed hold precisely the same views, yet they all differed widely from the later church writers. Looking to the freedom of the will for the intrinsic ground of the rise of sin, they regarded the agency of demons as pre-eminently its extrinsic occasion and exciting cause. In the Recognitions of Clement (1:29,) the dominion of sin over the race is by no means derived from Adam, but from the fact that in the eighth generation after Adam, the righteous and men leading a life of angels, enticed by the beauty of the women, had indulged in illegal and promiscuous intercourse, whence human passions became so impetuous as to draw all the race thenceforward into sin. This first sinning generation which begat the giants, was wholly swept off by the flood.

The golden age, moreover, was not located in Paradise, but comprised all the first eight generations; for then, even wild beasts obeyed man, and old age did not come on before the thousandth year of life. This long period of enjoyment and repose seduced men to forget God as the great Giver of good, and to withhold from him all further reverence, and consequently they became fearfully depraved. Hence God suffered physical evil to attach itself then to human nature, for the purpose of bringing man back again to himself.

Just so little also do the Homilies of Clement know (see Homilies 3: 22,) of the fall in consequence of eating of the tree of knowledge. On the contrary, they, like "The Recognitions," derive sin from that ingratitude which originated during the golden age, and from the influence of angels and demons.

Justin Martyr also derives the origin of sin from the passions of men together with the influence of demons. He

See Athenagoras on the resurrection of the dead, pg. 55.

Clement of Alexandria, [Pedagogue I. 2,] affirms that all men have the endowment of reason (logos) which would lead them to truth and goodness. As well among Christians as among the heathen, the wise who follow the light of reason do not sin intentionally, and if sin does occur, it quickly passes over. All men are, by reason of the circumstances of their rational nature, the beloved of God. Clement does indeed say (Pedagogue III. 12,) "Only the Logos himself is sinless, for to sin is inborn and common to all; but after sinning to recoil and return appertains not to every common man but to the good alone," yet he expresses in this passage only what occurs customarily, not what must occur of necessity, and he ascribes to every man the ability to be a good man. Hence also his affirmation that the heathen become blessed through philosophy-the christian, through faith in Christ.

See also Origen's homily on Jer. 14, 10. "Every man is endowed with reason; but though all men receive the gift alike, yet in the case of some its moral power grows stronger, but in the case of others it dies away."

does indeed in several passages mention the transgression of Adam, but does not suppose that either moral ruin or guilt passes over from that transgression to subsequent generations. On the contrary he holds that each man brings eternal death on himself whenever he sins as Adam sinned. With him also idolatry is the greatest of sins.

Theophilus teaches that man was not yet perfect in Paradise, but must first become so, and thus be transformed to the likeness of a God and ascend to heaven. The tree of knowl edge and its fruit were not noxious, but imparted knowledge; yet Adam, being still a child, did not know how to use this knowledge right, and hence God forbade him its fruit. After the transgression of this command, God drove man out of Paradise and subjected him to death, that under the influence of labor and sorrow he might again learn obedience, so that he might be restored to Paradise, after the resurrection. By sin, man brings on himself death, but by virtue, he attains eternal life. But the devil enticed Eve in order to introduce idolatry.

Athenagoras.comprises all sin in idolatry, and this was introduced by the demons. These demons he supposes to have come into existence through the intermarriage of incarnate angels with females of the human race.

Clement of Alexandria speaks in very strong terms against the opinion that man is by his birth, sinful and condemned, (Strom. III. p. 556 ff.) and seeks for the origin of all sin in the freedom of the human agent-a doctrine which he held most firmly. The Mosaic account of the fall and of paradise, he explains as an allegory to show how sin originates in the case of every man, and affirms that the devil i. e. the old serpent, seduced Adam into idolatry, and does the same yet continually with other men, by which means they incur the punishment of spiritual and eternal, but not of temporal death. Since death results from ignorance and irreverence of God, so on the other hand does immortality ensue from knowing and revering him. He was very far from concurring in the opinion held by later theologians that Adam before his fall was perfect, but that he and with him all the race lost by his fall their concreated perfection. He affirmed on the contrary that Adam had, as all men now have, the capability of becoming perfect, only they do not use it aright.

Just so little does Origen know of any original sin. He not only defends the free choice of men between good and evil in the remarkable passage (peri archon III. §2 ff.) and very explicitly