Original Sin

The reason Jesus is so revered is that it is believed that he was a scapegoat to save the world from "original sin"; the "sin" of Adam's ignoring Gods advice not to eat fruit from the "tree of knowledge of good and evil".

What is puzzling is that there is no mention in the Old Testament of the existence of original sin, defined as mankind's inherited guilt of Adam's going against God's advice as told in Genesis 2:9 and 2:17, which stated that Adam would die that day if he ate of the fruit.

Too, I have a little difficulty understanding exactly what "sin" was transgressed. God "advised" against eating the fruit since it was supposedly poisoned. Nothing was said of Adam's expulsion from the garden or that his future children would suffer as well. God's advice was like a child being warned not to get into rat poison after it had been placed out where it could be easily accessed. What did the serpent do wrong, since he obviously only told the truth? Who then was the liar?

Their removal from the garden meant eventual death since the garden also held the "tree of life", which gave them immortality, as long as they ate of it, as Genesis 3:22 states.

Adam was merely the gardener, tending it and living off its produce. Eve wandered about, presumably doing nothing special, except keeping Adam company. It appears they did not have sexual relations until they were exiled from the garden, as stated in Genesis 4:1.

The subject of "free will" crops up when anyone discusses Adam's transgression. But I find a weakness in the logic regarding Adam and Eve's "free will", since without some knowledge of good and evil they would not know the concept of "right and wrong", therefore be unable to make a moral choice, and thus not have "free will". It would be like disciplining a very young child who has not yet developed a sense of right and wrong and telling it not to do something that might harm it. Even our laws reflect the concept of innocence; so why not God in all his omniscience?

Original sin is not a subject that a person can find in a Bible Concordance. No references to Adam's sin can be found in the OT, and only four passages mention something similar to it can be found in the NT, such as: John 1:29, John 16:8, Romans 5:2, and 1 John 1:7.

Romans 5:2 states "...sin entered the world through one man...."; that Adam is to blame for sin entering the world seems extreme: and 1 John 1:17 states "...and the blood of Jesus, his son, purifies us all from sin." None of the NT passages clearly point to Adam as the source of the world's sinful state; however, even if Adam was accused of being the source of mankind's sin, Deuteronomy 24:16 counters the idea of sin being passed on to others by stating; "Fathers are not put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers, each is to die for his own sin." Other scriptures also support each person being guilty for his own deeds, such as stated in Romans 2:6 and Ezekiel 18:20.

If there was a need for a scapegoat, a human sacrifice to absolve mankind from some sin done by a distant ancestor, there would be no need for a Jesus Christ the Savior.

Another argument against using a human sacrifice to save mankind is that God says that he alone is the Savior of mankind; as Isaiah 43:11 states, "Before me no God was formed, nor will there be one after me....and apart from me there is no Savior". Other scriptures such as in Isaiah 49:26, 60:16, and Hosea 13:4 also so states. The passages also settles the question of Jesus being a deity--he apparently was not.