This is a concept that has caused debate, feuds, murder, and war. Augustine was one of the first theologians to explore the topic of original sin at great length (though, of course, it had been brought up and discussed before his time). Due to the many translations of the Bible, the exact words used as a base for the concept of original sin are much debated.

There are two “basic” ways that the concept of original sin is viewed (there are hundreds of small divisions within these two, but to keep it simple, we’re only going to look at two):

1) We are conceived and born with the stain of original sin upon us. It is an intrinsic part of our human nature to sin. Another view that is “close enough” for our current study is that humans don’t carry the actual “stain” of Adam’s original sin, but we do have the “tendency” to sin.
--In this view, baptism is a way of washing away the stain of original sin and consecrating a life to God. (In the RC, Mary is believed not to have been “sinless,” which, of course, is a designation only Jesus has….she is believed to have been born without the stain of “original sin.”)

2) Original sin, as such, does not exist. One of the main arguments for this is that: We are required to act according to our birth nature. If we are born sinful, then either we must sin, according to nature, -or- not sin, which would be a sin against nature. (The “son shall not bear the iniquity of the father” from Ezekiel is sometimes referenced, though many believe that applying something that affects one individual to the entire human race is nonsensical).
--In this view, baptism is a symbol for making a personal covenant with God and nothing more. Debate still exist among different believers as to whether babies, under this belief, should be baptized or not.


~Discussion Topics:

Which view (if either) do you subscribe to? Why?

Do you believe babies should be baptized? Why or why not?