The doctrine of original sin is based on the teaching that “For since death came by man, the resurrection of the dead also came by man. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive.” (1 Corinthians 15:21–22, WEB)
Paul says that death came through one man, referring to Adam. God warned Adam:
“Yahweh God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but you shall not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die.’” (Genesis 2:16–17, WEB)
However, in Genesis 3, Adam and Eve are deceived by the serpent and eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This brought sin into humanity, and subsequently death to all people-which is why we call this original sin.
This is also confirmed by verses like:
“For all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God.” (Romans 3:23, WEB)
This implies that everyone has sinned and can only be saved through Christ Jesus.
Even those unfamiliar with the Bible have likely heard the term “original sin”-it’s a widely known doctrine. However, different denominations, theologians, and traditions explain it differently, and it can be difficult for us to accept, regardless of the explanation.
Original sin includes the idea that Adam and Eve’s sin, or its consequences, are passed down to us, which can feel unfair-as if we’re responsible for a sin we didn’t commit. For this reason, people often avoid discussing original sin, or brush it off by saying “you’ll understand if you just believe” when someone asks about it. It’s difficult to explain because even theologians don’t fully understand it themselves.
Of course, properly understanding original sin is truly challenging. Why else would theologians explain it in so many different ways? However, we shouldn’t give up trying to understand it. By carefully examining the account of Adam and Eve eating the forbidden fruit, we can reach a logically acceptable level of understanding, even if a complete and perfect explanation is difficult. And once we understand original sin this way, we’ll see how it provides a basis for resolving many previously problematic issues.
Let’s begin. To understand original sin, we must first look at what God initially said. In Genesis 2:16–17 quoted above, God’s warning is “do not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.” People often mistakenly think the tree of life was also forbidden, but initially only the tree of the knowledge of good and evil was prohibited. The meaning of this tree is exactly as stated-“knowledge of good and evil.”
This “knowledge of good and evil” is the most crucial part in understanding original sin. Until they ate the forbidden fruit, humans were without sin. Being without sin means they did not sin in God’s eyes, and as mentioned before, the standard for judging sin is God’s own standard. This means that until then, people lived according to God’s standard. As we see in Genesis 2:19, where Adam names the animals, people already exercised free will in making judgments and actions, so we can infer that whatever they did before was judged by God’s standard.
But then the tree of the knowledge of good and evil appears. We don’t know why it was there, but we can assume that eating its fruit would indeed give knowledge of good and evil-God said so, and even in the serpent’s temptation scene, it’s said they would become like God, knowing good and evil. So the Bible’s intent seems clear.
What does this mean? As already stated, people were without sin despite exercising free will in making judgments. In judging good and evil, they were following God’s standard. But by eating the forbidden fruit, sin entered them. In other words, people who had been judging by God’s standard abandoned that standard and began judging good and evil by their own standard, thus bringing sin.
This is clearly revealed in their actions after eating the forbidden fruit:
“Their eyes were opened, and they both knew that they were naked. They sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.” (Genesis 3:7, WEB)
God did not judge their nakedness as sin, but they judged it as problematic.
Their second judgment is similar:
“They heard Yahweh God’s voice walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of Yahweh God among the trees of the garden. Yahweh God called to the man, and said to him, ‘Where are you?’ He said, ‘I heard your voice in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked; so I hid myself.’” (Genesis 3:8–10, WEB)
People who had never hidden from God before now judged by their own standard and feared Him, to the point where God had to ask where they were.
Thus, original sin refers to people who could not sin while judging by God’s standard departing from that standard to judge good and evil by their own standards, ultimately leading to sin. If this is original sin or its result, who among us can claim to be free from this sin? Everyone judges by their own standards. Those who know the Bible may try to live by God’s standard, but God hasn’t revealed His standard for everything. Even the law He gave was sometimes reduced because He knew people’s limitations (see Matthew 19:8, WEB), so we can’t say living by that standard means living without sin in God’s eyes (see Matthew 5:27–28, WEB). And as He fulfilled the law and gave a new commandment, this standard can also change. More precisely, it’s not that God’s standard changed, but that He decided to be more inclusive. Either way, we cannot know God’s definite standard.
Therefore, our judgments and actions, whatever they may be, inherently carry the possibility of sin. So we can say we live under the influence of this original sin of judging apart from God’s standard, or in other words, that we have inherited original sin-not just the possibility of sin as a result of original sin, but original sin itself in not living by God’s standard.
If we focus not on Adam and Eve’s action of eating the forbidden fruit, but on the situation of abandoning God’s standard in judging good and evil, such an explanation becomes possible.
Of course, this explanation doesn’t mean that judging by one’s own standard is inherently bad. People can be good or evil based on their judgments and actions. However, since God judges that good and evil, ultimately no one can escape condemnation. Since a person becomes a sinner even with just one sin in their lifetime, who in this world could be free from this? From this perspective of thinking and judging by one’s own standard, no one is without original sin.
In Genesis 6, God said:
“Yahweh saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. Yahweh was sorry that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him in his heart.” (Genesis 6:5–6, WEB)
Unless we regain God’s standard, no one can escape sin.
* * *
Thinking about original sin this way raises one issue-the judgment the woman (Eve) made before eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil:
“When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit, and ate; and she gave some to her husband with her, and he ate.” (Genesis 3:6, WEB)
She was already making an incorrect judgment before eating the fruit. As mentioned earlier, these people had no sin because they judged by God’s standard. But at this point, she makes a wrong judgment. How did this happen? This issue can be resolved by looking at whose perspective she’s judging from now.
“The serpent said to the woman, ‘You won’t surely die, for God knows that in the day you eat it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’” (Genesis 3:4–5, WEB)
She judges not by God’s standard that she knew, but by the serpent’s standard. That’s how she could make an incorrect judgment before committing original sin.
Does it seem strange that she could make such a judgment when she knew God’s standard? Let’s consider our own case. We have things we’ve learned and heard to be right. Then someone comes and says, “Your thinking is wrong. This situation should actually be thought of this way.” Hearing this, we might listen or we might not. This is not a matter of standards, but of choice.
She knew God’s standard but made judgments with free will. That’s how it always was. Until then, she only knew God’s standard so couldn’t sin, but now she also knew the serpent’s standard, so she freely chose between them. Though she lived by God’s standard, this was possible because she herself was not God.
Thinking this way, we can view her words even before hearing the serpent’s standard a bit differently:
“We may eat fruit from the trees of the garden, but of the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.’” (Genesis 3:2–3, WEB)
This subtly differs from what God said, which might make one think the event of original sin occurred because there was a problem with her, but this might not be an incorrect answer. Because acting according to those words wouldn’t lead to sin. If we consider her problematic for not giving a perfect answer, then we who can’t perfectly relay what we’ve heard would also be problematic.
God created her and saw that she was good (Genesis 1:31, WEB). God didn’t create another perfect being. He created humans who could become perfect when with God, not another god.
Jesus said this at the Last Supper:
“I will pray to the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, that he may be with you forever-the Spirit of truth, whom the world can’t receive; for it doesn’t see him, neither knows him. You know him, for he lives with you, and will be in you.” (John 14:16–17, WEB)
“In that day you will know that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you.” (John 14:20, WEB)
“Jesus answered him, ‘If a man loves me, he will keep my word. My Father will love him, and we will come to him, and make our home with him.’” (John 14:23, WEB)
We are not perfect beings. But through time spent with God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit within us, we will gradually become closer to perfection-just like in those times when we could walk with God in the Garden of Eden.
* * *
Lastly, I’ll address some contentious issues regarding original sin from this perspective. Jesus was born without original sin. This is obvious because Jesus is sinless. But when original sin is understood as some kind of sinful nature passed down through genes, it leads to the idea that for Jesus to be without original sin, the Virgin Mary must also have been without original sin. This is thought to be necessary to create a situation where Jesus has no original sin. But for this to be true, Mary’s parents would also need to be without original sin, and their parents too, and so on. This is because original sin is thought to be inherited. Ultimately, this creates an unsolvable problem, so Catholics say Mary alone was without original sin, while Protestants don’t accept this idea at all. This disagreement arises from different understandings of original sin, so let’s reconsider Jesus’ original sin from the perspective I’ve presented.
I’ve explained original sin as people judging good and evil by their own standards. As I’ll mention later, Jesus, as one of the three persons of the Trinity, is essentially equal to God. Therefore, Jesus’ standard can be said to be God’s standard, meaning that if Jesus judges something as sin, it is sin, and if He judges it as not sin, it is not sin. So even if human flesh is affected by original sin, this is irrelevant to Jesus. As long as Jesus uses God’s standard, no sin can ever apply to Him. We can confirm this from Jesus’ own words:
“I can of myself do nothing. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is righteous; because I don’t seek my own will, but the will of my Father who sent me.” (John 5:30, WEB)
“You judge according to the flesh. I judge no one. Even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for I am not alone, but I am with the Father who sent me.” (John 8:15–16, WEB)
From this perspective, we can see that it doesn’t matter whether the Virgin Mary had original sin or not. This is because original sin is not about inherited evil, but about what each person’s standard of judgment is. There’s absolutely no need to make someone else holy for the sake of Jesus’ holiness.
