Dr Abdur Rahman Bhutta, Germany
Section 7 – The myth of original sin and its forgiveness
Not long after the days of Mosesas, when the Jews occupied the promised land and became affluent, they got attracted to the pagan rites and rituals around them. Now they found the divine commandments to be too heavy for them to follow. Being the descendants of Abrahamas and “the chosen people of God”, they presumed that they would not go to Hell, or if at all they went, it would be for a very short period. (Tafsir-e-Kabir by Hazrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmadra, Vol. 2, 1986, Surah al-Baqarah, Ch. 2, V. 112, p. 118)
(7a) Animal sacrifices and forgiveness of sins
For the forgiveness of their sins, they depended mostly on the intercession of their prophets and the sacrifices of their animals in the temples. They believed that the blood of their sacrificial animals would wash away their sins. And this belief played havoc with their moral and spiritual lives and made them drift further away from the path of righteousness. (Ibid., Surah al-Baqarah, Ch. 2, V. 49, pp. 402-406)
(7b) The animal sacrifices are a symbol for the sacrifice of evil desires
They forgot that these sacrifices were only a symbol for the sacrifice of their evil desires and wicked thoughts; otherwise God did not need them. They forgot that for their sacrifices to be accepted by God, it was a soft, sincere and submissive heart that was required; and that for their sins to be washed away, it were the tears of remorse and repentance that were needed and not the blood of their animals.
God raised many prophets among them who warned them that, for the forgiveness of their sins, these offerings and sacrifices were not going to avail them unless they changed their hearts, turned away from their evil ways and sincerely obeyed the divine commandments. They told them that “God desires steadfast love and not sacrifice” and that He could forgive them even without any sacrifice if they turned to Him begging for His mercy and obeying His commandments. But the majority of them did not listen to their prophets; rather they rejected and persecuted them instead. (Isa. 1:10-18; Jer. 14:10-12; 17:26,27; Ezk. 20:18-29, 39-45; Mic. 6:6-8; Hos. 6:6)
(7c) The blood of a ‘holy man’ to wash the ‘Original sin’
Saint Paul and his followers, who were deeply influenced by Hellenistic mythology, interpreted the attempted crucifixion of Jesusas as a “sacrifice for the forgiveness of their sins”. Instead of the blood of animals, now they could see the “holy blood of a holy man”, washing away their sins. They quickly devised the concept of the “original sin” and went about preaching that all men; Jews and Gentiles, have inherited the sin committed by Adamas; and that, even if they do not commit any sin, obey God and follow His commands in letter and spirit, this “original sin” inherited by them cannot be forgiven by God unless they believe that “Jesus, the son of God, died on the cross for their sins”.
(7d) Adam’s offspring could not be accountable for his ‘sin’
Explaining logically, a biblical commentary has rightly argued that the offspring of Adamas cannot be held accountable for his “personal sin”. It writes:
“Adam sinned of his own free choice as a perfect human, free from disabilities, a state his offspring have clearly never enjoyed. So, these factors seem out of harmony with the view that ‘when Adam sinned, all his as yet unborn descendants sinned with him’. For all Adam’s descendants to be held accountable as participants in Adam’s personal sin would require some expression of will on their part as to having him as their family head.
Yet none of them in reality willed to be born of him, their birth into the Adamic line resulting from the fleshly will of their parents.—John 1:13”. (Aid to Bible Understanding by Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, New York, USA, 1971, under ‘Sin’, p.1505)
The commentary has very rightly concluded that the offspring of Adamas cannot be held accountable for his sin, although we disagree with the statement that Adamas “had sinned of his own free choice”. It has been already shown from the analysis of the biblical story that both Adamas and Eve had no intention of defying God’s command and that they were the victims of deception by the devil (serpent). It is also said that Adamas was a “perfect human free from disabilities”. However, before Adamas committed the so-called sin, he had no “knowledge of good and evil”. Is this ignorance not a disability? So we can see that Adamas was not that “perfect a human” to start with as mentioned by the commentary. And it is also generally known that “To err is human”. So we see that no human is that perfect even today.
The commentary, having declared that the descendants of Adamas cannot be held accountable for his sin, still goes on to incriminate them by saying:
“The evidence, then, points to a passing on of sin from Adam to succeeding generations due to the recognised law of heredity Sin (and its consequences) entered and spread to all human race not merely because Adam was the family head of the race but because he (and not Eve) was its progenitor or human life source. His offspring would inescapably inherit, not merely physical characteristics like those of their common father, and also of their common sinful mother, but also personality traits, including inclination towards sin”. (Ibid.)
(7d-i) Only ‘traits and inclination’ cannot make one accountable
Even if we agree that due to the “law of heredity”, some “traits and inclinations towards sin” were passed on to Adam’sas descendants, we cannot agree that they can be held accountable only on the basis of these “traits and inclinations”. It is not the mere possession of “sinful traits and inclinations”, but the deliberate commission of the “sinful act”, that can make men accountable or punishable.
We have read above that, talking logically, the commentary has absolved the descendants of Adamas from the accountability for his “sinful act” on the ground that their will or intention was not involved in having Adamas as their fore-father. But now talking irrationally, it goes on to declare all the descendants of Adamas not only accountable for Adam’sas sin but also punishable, and that too with death. How unjustly it goes on to write:
“To be true to himself, as well as for the good of the rest of his universal family, Jehova God could not countenance such sinful course, either on the part of his human creatures or that of the spirit son turned rebel. Maintaining his holiness, he justly imposed the sentence of death on them all.” (Ibid.)
One wonders where in the universe, and in which form, this “rest of Jehova God’s universal family” lives for whose “good He has justly imposed death sentence on all human creatures here on earth!”. The whole concept is so absurd that it does not need any further commentary.
(7e) The sin and the law of heredity
As far as the moral and spiritual offences are concerned, the ‘Law of heredity’ does not go against a person accused of these offences. If anything, it goes in favour of the person accused of such religious offences. If it is proved that a particular person was predisposed to an offence on account of some “heredity or congenital defect”, he may not even be accused of that offence. Therefore, in the case of failure to obey a particular divine command, it is only the “intention and will” of the person that holds weight with God, and not his actual failure or fault on account of his physical or mental limitations, be they hereditary or acquired. “Allah burdens not a soul beyond its capacity”, says God in the Holy Quran. (Surah al-Baqarah, Ch. 2: V. 287)
(7e-i) The thoughts and actions, good or bad, cannot be transferred genetically.
The very idea that the entire progeny of Adamas and Eve became genetically polluted with the sin of its parents is baseless. The science of genetics reveals that the thoughts and actions, be they good or bad, even if adhered to persistently during the entire lifetime of a person, cannot be transferred to, and encoded into the genetic system of, the human reproduction. A human lifespan is too short a period to bring about such a profound change. Even generation after generation, the vices or virtues of a people cannot be transmitted to the progeny as genetic characters. Perhaps millions of years are required for etching human genes with new characters. (Christianity: A Journey from Facts to Fiction, Hazrat Mirza Tahir Ahmadrh, 1994, p. 14)
It is, therefore, senseless to propose that the one transient “sin of Adam” had made his whole progeny as the “congenital and eternal sinners”. And it is also a mockery of divine justice to suggest that the Just God had no other choice but to condemn the whole progeny of Adamas to death for that one sin of Adamas. Then, in order to forgive this “sinful progeny” of Adamas, God punished His own “innocent son” for the “sins of Adam and his progeny”. How can we call it “an expression of Justice on the part of Just and Merciful God?”.
(7f) Saint Paul, the real founder of Christianity
Christianity, as we see it all over the world, has nothing of Christ except his name affixed to it. All its main dogmas are traced back to Saint Paul and not to Jesus Christ. Saint Paul borrowed many myths from the pagan culture current in the Roman empire and preached them around in the name of Jesusas.
In this respect, The Jerome Biblical Commentary writes: “Hellenistic and eastern religions exercised a profound influence on NT theology especially on that of Paul that early Christianity’s idea of redemption by the death and resurrection of Christ was borrowed from a pre-Christian redeemer Myth According to Bousset, Paul and his successors transformed primitive Christianity into Mystery cult. Many of the early Christian groups in the Hellenistic world, had been mystery fellowships which now simply worshipped a new god, Jesus.” (Jerome Biblical Commentary, [ed.] Raymond Edward Brown, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland E. Murphy. Sec. 41:40-41)
Dr. Johannes Weiss, of Heidelberg University says:
“Hence the faith in Christ as held by Paul was something new in comparison with the teachings of Jesus; it was a new type of religion.” (Paul and Jesus, Dr. Johannes Weiss, 1909, p. 130)
The Professor of theology of Zurich University, Dr. Arnold Meyer is very elaborate and explicit on this important issue. Explaining “Who founded the Christianity, Jesus or Paul?”, He writes:
“If by Christianity we understand faith in the Christ as heavenly Son of God who did not belong to earthly humanity, but who lived in the Divine likeness and glory, who came down from heaven to earth, who entered humanity and took upon himself a human form through a virgin, that he might make propitiation for men’s sins by his own blood upon the cross, who was then awakened from death and raised to the right hand of God, as the Lord of his own people, who believe in him, who hears their prayers, guards and leads them, who will come again with the clouds of heaven to judge the world, who will cast down all the foes of God, and will bring his own people with him unto the home of heavenly light so that they may become like His glorified body. If this is Christianity, then such Christianity was founded by St. Paul and not by our Lord.” (Jesus or Paul, Dr Arnold Meyer, 1909, under ‘who was the founder of Christianity’, pp. 122-123)
(7g) – Is this ‘Fall of Adam’ an individual punishment?
Adam’sas unintentional error of eating the fruit forbidden by God, and his subsequent expulsion from the garden of Eden, is usually labelled as the “Fall of Adam”. But from the biblical story we learn that Adamas was not the only party that had suffered the so-called “fall”. The other party too, had suffered that “fall”. In fact the “fall” suffered by the other party appears to be far worse than that of Adamas.
Let us briefly review the main points of the story from the Christian point of view and see what it offers us to believe.
(7g-i)
The story has it that God created man in His own image. He put this “holy man” named Adamas, in the garden and hoped that he would multiply and fill the earth with his “holy children”. But the serpent came in and made this holy man commit a sin. So that holy Adamas became “unholy”. Now this sin of Adamas was inherited by all his progeny; and the earth became filled with “born sinners”. Since the “wages of sin” is said to be death, God punished Adamas with death, and this punishment of death also spread among all the progeny of Adam. (Rom. 5:12; 6:23)
So we can see that the serpent had spoiled the whole plan of God who ended up with the earth full of “born sinners” instead of the “holy ones”. As the number of these evil and “born sinners” increased , God was very “it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.”; and He even decided to “destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth” (Gen. 6:5-8). Now, one may ask: Whose fall is this? Obviously, with the fall of Adamas, fell his Creator too.
(7g-ii)
Now God could have protected His plan as well as save humanity from this catastrophic “fall” by forgiving the “sin of Adam”. However, we are told that the problem faced by God was that He could not forgive this “sin or its punishment of death” because that would have been against justice. So this “sin of Adam” kept on spreading throughout his generations; and millions after millions of people were born with this “sin” and suffered death as a “punishment for Adam’s sin”.
All along a sad and sorrowful God had been thinking of some means of redeeming His beloved mankind from this punishment of death but He could do nothing except curse the serpent who had spoiled all His plans.
At last after thousands of years, God hit upon a novel plan with which He could save mankind from the “punishment of inherited sin” and at the same time punish somebody to satisfy the demand of His justice. He decided to punish His own holy son instead and forgive the sinful mankind.
So He sent His innocent and sinless son into the world and, with the help of the Jews, this crying, weeping and praying “son of God” was driven and dragged to the execution site and “put to death” on the cross. Justice had been done and love expressed! God had taken revenge of Adam’sas disobedience. God had hit back without caring who had disobeyed Him and who was being hit.
(7g-iii)
The above mentioned “execution of Justice”, is said to be an expression of love and sacrifice on the part of “Father and His son” for the forgiveness of mankind. But God has not been very fair to humanity in this expression of His love and punishment to His son. When God punished Adamas and his children, He punished them with real death. They died, were buried in the ground, mixed with the dust and never rose again.
But when He punished His own “son” for the sins of humanity, He raised him up on the very third day and took him up to Himself. Is this justice?. Is this sacrifice? How can this temporary death compensate for the permanent death that Adamas and his children were to suffer?
If God had really decided to sacrifice His “son” for the sake of humanity, He should have let him die a real death so that people could visit his tomb and see the unique example of God’s love for them. But what God has done now is just a drama which cannot be taken seriously. We know that as soon as the “curtains” were dropped and the “spectators” went away, the “dead son” rose up and went home hale and hearty. There had been no real sacrifice, nor had there been any forgiveness of that “inherited” sin.
That is why even after their faith in the “sacrifice” of Jesusas, the Christian faithful have not been redeemed from the “punishments” of Adam’sas sin. They still “toil for their bread with sweat of their face”, their women still “have great desire for their husbands” and they still “bear children with great pains”. And all of them “suffer death, go to the ground and mix with dust”. So where is salvation and who received it?
(7h) – Conclusion: The story of Adam and Eve is symbolic.
The story of Adamas, Eve and the serpent as given in Genesis is full of symbolism and needs to be carefully interpreted. It also potentially contains material borrowed from ancient mythologies which may have been used to convey some deep lying message but do not reflect the whole truth. We can learn some lessons and infer some moral from it but a symbolic story which is open to various interpretations, and which has also received many interpolations, cannot be taken literally, nor can we base our faith on such a sandy and shaky foundation.
Confirming the metaphoric nature of the story, and mythological origin of the material used to form it, the Peake’s Commentary on the Bible writes:
“Other references in the OT show that the Yahwist is using here a myth which formed part of an ancient Hebrew tradition. Similarly the analysis of the text has shown that in the original form of the myth, there was only one tree whose nature was not disclosed, so that we may assume that it is the Yahwist himself who has shaped the myth so as to present the two contrasted trees with their different properties, one of them containing the fruit of forbidden knowledge and the other containing the fruit of immortal life…
“[…] the author has so blended all these diverse elements in such a way as to present a symbolic pattern of the underlying causes of all God’s activity in the Creation and Redemption. These things could only be said in myth and symbol, and those who would deny the myth and try to take the story literally, lose thereby all the significance of the divine language of symbol.” (Arthur Peake, Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, 1962, under Genesis, 146b-c, p. 180)