Are we born sinners?

I think the crux of your question is a sin definition. I agree with you that the parents trying to blame crying on sin might need to check their general levels of laziness. But maybe more for those parents the issue of sin is actually central. A baby or a spouse has the ability to make our sin evident in ways nothing else ever could because they require attention and affirmation. They even require attention and affirmation from us when we wish it could be directed towards us instead.
If sin is me at the center, self-centeredness, then being born into it makes sense to me. I think to really get my head around how deep it goes I have to let go of the idea of sin being some malicious act by me towards the outside world. I wonder if it’s more a self-centered response to a need that I have to be told that I’m worth it. When a baby cries it has needs and somehow that crying eventually becomes self-centered crying we have to train out of them. I think this issue gets framed really poorly a lot. If we make it a question of being born as bad people I think we’ve made it too shallow. Thoughts?
- Landon

Hi Christa,

Great question, and one much contested for a couple thousand years.

To start with, it doesn’t strike me that treating a crying infant in that way is a necessary inference from the view that children are born sinners. (Such treatmnent says more about the sinful mind of the parents). Nor does the fact that the parents act that way toward a crying infant lead necessarily to the view that we are born sinners.

I do believe that all have sinned (Romans 3:23), but that “all” must be understood as having at least one exception, Jesus. There may be other exceptions, e.g. those who for reason of age or infirmity are not culpable for their falling short. A lot depends on what kind of moral theology or philosophy we bring to the text.

But irregardless of what view one takes on that, one also has to consider Romans 5:12-20. There are lots of interpretive issues here as well. But one thing I take from it is that whatever legacy of guilt or corruption that Adam imparted to humanity, Jesus has more than healed it. In that sense, I agree with Robert, we need the grace of God.

It may well be that Romans 5 is teaching that Jesus has restored original righteousness so that the only sin for which we are held accountable is sin we actually choose to commit. That would make sense in light of Ezekiel 18.

Why do we “all” end up sinning? The bigger mystery is how Adam and Eve fell in the first place when they lived in a paradise (albeit one contested by the serpent). We are all now born into a world where the deck is much more stacked against us than it was for them.

Why would we need Jesus? To restore us to original righteousness and redeem us from subsequent sin that we choose. But we would need Jesus even if no one ever sinned. He is the our Creator, Sustainer and Consummator. God’s goal for humanity was always to bring human beings to the image of the Son of Man, even before the Fall.

Dale has written on this here: http://soulation.org/livingwithquestions/?p=165

Big topic. Thanks for taking Jonalyn’s hint and asking!

I’m an attachment parenting advocate. I teach on it, sometimes in our church. You wouldn’t believe how many Christian parents have been taught through books and pastors that a crying infant is “sinning” by “manipulating” their parents. It’s RAMPANT teaching.

I also wonder if we even have a “SIN NATURE” or if we are persuaded to sin by aspiring to be a “part of the world” A “sin nature” suggests that we have no other choice, though we all WILL sin…doesn’t mean that we MUST sin. :::Shrug::: it seems like semantics, but I still think it’s important. If we don’t CHOOSE the sin, then how can we feel the weight of what we’ve done in light of the cross?