There are many reasons -- Adilbrand Noblesword's Hall of Warriors

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 13:29:06 03/02/02 Sat
Author: Omega
Subject: There are many reasons
In reply to: Adilbrand 's message, "I have a question, too." on 12:23:27 02/27/02 Wed

Sorry if I am slow to reply lately -- school is much busier this semester, and to top it off, my fatigue has been worse lately (since around Christmas).

There are many answers to your question, but each one needs to be looked upon in their own light, and then looked at how they interact to make the situation even worse.

I will try provide a simplified answer, nonetheless.

I would start and say the greatest influence to Western Christianity (and that's what you are most accustomed to, be it Roman Catholic or Lutheran or Calvinist or Baptist) has been St. Augustine. There is no doubt about it, he was a genius, and had tremendous influence and help to Western theology, when it really was beginning to take shape. Because of it, some of his excesses, often taken out of a context St. Augustine even had for them to soften what he said, have shaped the ideas behind many western perspectives. This is of course the case with original sin, on both accounts. He was trying to explore some of the questions addressed, and his answer was original sin -- but even when he pointed it out, in his own writings he also pointed out the goodness of human nature -- but that second part was often ignored to make the points on original sin excessive.

This led to looking at humanity only within the framework of sin and being evil. Though this is not necessarily the fulness of the case in Catholicism, because Catholicism would look at the other side when pointing out the need for virtue and pointing to the Saints (where they are seen as symbols of the holiness we too can achieve). The Reformation though reacted with a strenghtening of the notion of original sin to really demand a very poor conception of humanity, and a very very very arbitrary God that will give grace to some, for no merits of their own since they can't have any, and on the other hand rejecting others.

Sadly this also influenced Catholicism. Again, it has within it other perspectives which help balance the question out, but nonetheless, the culture at large, especially in the dominate nations of the world, have mostly been protestant, and so the protestant notions have a strength which begets general agreement, which often transcends religious lines.

Now saying this, on the other hand, Eastern Christianity for example went about the question in a different light. They respected St Augustine, but they also thought he went to excess on many issues. St. Augustine was very polemic in his writings, and he did a traditional rhetorical tool: to get someone to understand one's viewpoint, one exaggerates and hopes the end result will be somewhere in the middle. Nonetheless, these excesses did not go well within Eastern theology. They viewed the general goodness of humanity still kept within -- yes it was weakened, and that potential original nature is there. Sin itself, in all sides, should not be viewed as some substance, which again makes us as people evil -- that again is a notion which quickly developed, often because it is simple to understand sin along those lines, and so what is simple is often easier to follow (and this is why catechisms often teach a simpler, often childish view of religion, and where most people in all religions stay).

Most Christians especially have a very low understanding of theology. It isn't needed for a relationship with the other, and so they confuse their relationship as giving the fulness of insight, and so their simple views often continue alongside with their developing personality. Their education or knowledge often does not grow along the same lines as other parts of their person (if they do grow, for many, if most, might not grow). So one generation's simplicity and simple answers become passed down, especially if all there is -- is hymns, homily, and a low-key scripture reading without a pursuit of the more difficult questions which need to address philosophy, pscyhology, science, history, etc. How many people are prepared for it? And if they are not, often it is easier for them to live at a simpler level, and it is good for them even.

Anyway I do not know if that exactly helps. Really, I only touched on some of the aspects that answer the question, but I think it should at least help situate where the thrust on original sin most understand is coming from. I would even suggest it is often like conceptions of evolution -- we know there are many. Some are very popular and more widely supported than others, and even if a scientist follows one set of beliefs on evolution, they can respect where the other is coming from. Just when we are searching and trying to understand, some understandings offer ways that help many people more than others, and sometimes simplicity or simple answers "we evolved from apes" makes the impact easier than a thorough explanation.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]