Skip to main content

Denying Original Sin and the Plain Meaning of the Bible

Image
Posted by

It is both annoying and baffling how some folks do not want to take the Bible at face value, instead elevating their opinions or secular science views above Scripture. If you study on it a spell, false religions do something similar: We will tell you what the passages mean, do not think you can understand it.

When someone cites William Lane Craig, I am on guard. While he can dismantle atheism, he has compromised in key areas of Christian doctrine. One of these is original sin.

While people can misunderstand the plain meaning of some parts of the Bible, original sin is clearly understood.
The Garden of Eden with the Fall of Man, Jan Brueghel the Elder and Peter Paul Rubens,1615
I'll allow that the words original sin do not appear in the Bible, but other essential Christian doctrines, such as the Trinity, are not found under the names we know. That does not make them any less real. Although Craig mocks original sin (Adam and Eve at the forbidden fruit, and we inherit the sin nature), it is clearly evident from a plain reading of Scripture. This heresy is serious, and people should be very careful about getting any theology from this man.
Dr William Lane Craig is a well-known and respected apologist cited by many prominent Christians. So, it is shocking, for many, to hear that he is also an avid anticreationist. Craig tries to reconcile evolution with Genesis by categorizing Genesis as mytho-history—a type of theological fable that is not meant to be understood as real history. In an online interview with Sean McDowell, Craig said:
“My greatest fear is that the young-earth creationist might be right in his hermeneutical claim that Genesis does teach those things that I described earlier. And I say that would be a nightmare because if that’s what the Bible teaches, it puts the Bible into massive, I think, irredeemable conflict with modern science, history, and linguistics, and I don’t want that to happen.”
By “science”, he means evolution. His quote reveals that his authority is not the Bible, but secular science! As such, Craig’s commitment to evolution forces him to undermine even basic Christian doctrines.

One other thing, then I'll provide the link to the rest of the article. We can also get ourselves in trouble by taking some biblical things at face value and wrongly assuming we know the plain meaning (think of handling venomous snakes or refusing medical attention, both to "prove" faith). Use immediate context, as well as cultural and linguistic when interpreting Scripture. Also, utilize resources from ministries that believe the Bible. You savvy that, pilgrim? Okay, you can finish the above article at "The Conundrum of Compromise — And the damage of not taking the Scriptures at face value."