Original Sin

[CelticRebel]

I find that I am in agreement with the Orthodox teaching on sin and original sin. I know Orthodoxy views sin as a sickness or a missing of the mark. Does Orthodoxy also see sin as rebellion against God?

 

[Ignatius21]

I find a very wide variety of views among Orthodox when it comes to "original sin." Most draw a very hard line between "ancestral sin" and "original sin," while others show that it was never especially clear-cut throughout our history. To say that the East views sin as sickness, while the West views it as rebellion against God, is to me a gross oversimplification. Even the most hardened Lutheran or Calvinist still would agree with the statement that sin is a sickness. And it's hard to deny that Paul sees sin as rebellion against God in Romans especially. I think the key is that the two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

I believe sin should be understood more like a "terminal illness." Many Protestants see us as already born dead (total depravity). Some Orthodox (sounding an awful lot like liberal Protestants) overreact and speak of sin as being more like a runny nose. It makes God sad and all, but he certainly would never be angry toward sin.

The basic story is pretty simple, really. Adam, in sinning (he was deceived, but it was still by his own free choice that he ate of the fruit), brought death upon himself and all his posterity (us) as a result. The outbreak of terminal sickness began with man's "original sin." It's warped and distorted and destroyed us ever since--the devil himself ruling over us through "death and the fear of death" as written in Hebrews. When Jesus came, he came as a man, and took upon himself the curse of death. But it could not hold him! It is the consequence of sin, and he was sinless. Thus he turned everything on its head. By death, he destroyed death. In allowing the devil to take him captive, he destroyed the gates of Hades and the devil himself became captive. So long as we remain in Adam, we are subject to the death and suffering that he brought upon us. When we are in Christ, the Last Adam, it's reversed, and our death actually becomes our liberation. We who are baptized have already died! To sin, to the law, to bondage. We live now to Christ, and though our bodies die (as did his), we too shall be raised and share in his own resurrection.

In light of that grand story, whether sin is understood more like sickness, or more like rebellion, whether we speak sometimes of death as a consequence, or other times as punishment--I'm really not convinced it matters all that much. Christ is risen! Death is overthrown! Sin has no power! That's pretty much it.

 

[CelticRebel]

I find a very wide variety of views among Orthodox when it comes to "original sin." Most draw a very hard line between "ancestral sin" and "original sin," while others show that it was never especially clear-cut throughout our history. To say that the East views sin as sickness, while the West views it as rebellion against God, is to me a gross oversimplification. Even the most hardened Lutheran or Calvinist still would agree with the statement that sin is a sickness. And it's hard to deny that Paul sees sin as rebellion against God in Romans especially. I think the key is that the two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

I believe sin should be understood more like a "terminal illness." Many Protestants see us as already born dead (total depravity). Some Orthodox (sounding an awful lot like liberal Protestants) overreact and speak of sin as being more like a runny nose. It makes God sad and all, but he certainly would never be angry toward sin.

The basic story is pretty simple, really. Adam, in sinning (he was deceived, but it was still by his own free choice that he ate of the fruit), brought death upon himself and all his posterity (us) as a result. The outbreak of terminal sickness began with man's "original sin." It's warped and distorted and destroyed us ever since--the devil himself ruling over us through "death and the fear of death" as written in Hebrews. When Jesus came, he came as a man, and took upon himself the curse of death. But it could not hold him! It is the consequence of sin, and he was sinless. Thus he turned everything on its head. By death, he destroyed death. In allowing the devil to take him captive, he destroyed the gates of Hades and the devil himself became captive. So long as we remain in Adam, we are subject to the death and suffering that he brought upon us. When we are in Christ, the Last Adam, it's reversed, and our death actually becomes our liberation. We who are baptized have already died! To sin, to the law, to bondage. We live now to Christ, and though our bodies die (as did his), we too shall be raised and share in his own resurrection.

In light of that grand story, whether sin is understood more like sickness, or more like rebellion, whether we speak sometimes of death as a consequence, or other times as punishment--I'm really not convinced it matters all that much. Christ is risen! Death is overthrown! Sin has no power! That's pretty much it.

Thanks for your detailed response -- excellent!

 

[Lukaris]

I think our understanding is more our fallen state in which we are subject to sinful passions in which, depending on our disposition, we choose to sin or not to varying degrees. This is a very precarious situation in which propensities to commit evil or fall into dejection plague us. It is with a sense of mourning in which we need to repent to the Lord and cooperate in faith to realize His propitiation for our sins. We have to be more proactive in our repentance since the Lord commands us to love God and neighbor.

I am relating my understanding to this article on repentance as preached by St. Gregory Palamas:

http://www.pravmir.com/repentance-according-to-saint-gregory-palamas/

 

[ArmyMatt]

Does Orthodoxy also see sin as rebellion against God?

in a sense absolutely. that is one of the symptoms and causes of the sickness.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Beautifully stated, Ignatius!!!

I find a very wide variety of views among Orthodox when it comes to "original sin." Most draw a very hard line between "ancestral sin" and "original sin," while others show that it was never especially clear-cut throughout our history. To say that the East views sin as sickness, while the West views it as rebellion against God, is to me a gross oversimplification. Even the most hardened Lutheran or Calvinist still would agree with the statement that sin is a sickness. And it's hard to deny that Paul sees sin as rebellion against God in Romans especially. I think the key is that the two ideas are not mutually exclusive.

I believe sin should be understood more like a "terminal illness." Many Protestants see us as already born dead (total depravity). Some Orthodox (sounding an awful lot like liberal Protestants) overreact and speak of sin as being more like a runny nose. It makes God sad and all, but he certainly would never be angry toward sin.

The basic story is pretty simple, really. Adam, in sinning (he was deceived, but it was still by his own free choice that he ate of the fruit), brought death upon himself and all his posterity (us) as a result. The outbreak of terminal sickness began with man's "original sin." It's warped and distorted and destroyed us ever since--the devil himself ruling over us through "death and the fear of death" as written in Hebrews. When Jesus came, he came as a man, and took upon himself the curse of death. But it could not hold him! It is the consequence of sin, and he was sinless. Thus he turned everything on its head. By death, he destroyed death. In allowing the devil to take him captive, he destroyed the gates of Hades and the devil himself became captive. So long as we remain in Adam, we are subject to the death and suffering that he brought upon us. When we are in Christ, the Last Adam, it's reversed, and our death actually becomes our liberation. We who are baptized have already died! To sin, to the law, to bondage. We live now to Christ, and though our bodies die (as did his), we too shall be raised and share in his own resurrection.

In light of that grand story, whether sin is understood more like sickness, or more like rebellion, whether we speak sometimes of death as a consequence, or other times as punishment--I'm really not convinced it matters all that much. Christ is risen! Death is overthrown! Sin has no power! That's pretty much it.

 

[Ignatius21]

I think our understanding is more our fallen state in which we are subject to sinful passions in which, depending on our disposition, we choose to sin or not to varying degrees. This is a very precarious situation in which propensities to commit evil or fall into dejection plague us. It is with a sense of mourning in which we need to repent to the Lord and cooperate in faith to realize His propitiation for our sins. We have to be more proactive in our repentance since the Lord commands us to love God and neighbor.

I am relating my understanding to this article on repentance as preached by St. Gregory Palamas:

http://www.pravmir.com/repentance-according-to-saint-gregory-palamas/

So, St. Gregory Palamas wouldn't have put a WWJD sticker on the back of his car?

That was a very helpful article. Much of the legalism against which Protestantism reacted was clearly not accepted or practiced by Gregory. In fact, much of what I was taught in my Protestant days were things like "Sin isn't a list of bad things you can't do," and "repentance isn't a checklist of things you apologize to God for, then go do penance, but repentance is a lifelong change." Things that really can't be disagreed with. Yet another thing that makes me wonder how the Reformation would have been different, had there been more interaction with the Orthodox...or perhaps, had it taken place sooner, before these views had become so entrenched.

Or even, had Rome sat down and accepted Luther's requests to debate, rather than calling him a wild boar and trying to silence him...

One thing in this article that bugs me, is the reference to "the pure patristic tradition." That seems to be as much of a throwaway line as "the plain meaning of Scripture" or "we have a proper understanding of justification." It strikes me as one of those triumphalistic catch phrases that gets used (often by Orthodox, but also by just about anyone else) when they want to throw down a trump card without backing it up. Just my 2 cents.