The Architecture of a Fall: A Theological and Historical Analysis of the Doctrine of Original Sin

Introduction: From Cosmic “Oops” to Foundational Doctrine

The Christian doctrine of Original Sin, at times colloquially dismissed as a “cosmic ‘Oops!'” or a “theological mud puddle,” represents one of Western civilization’s most complex, contentious, and consequential intellectual constructs. Far from a simple declaration of inherent human failure, it is a sophisticated and evolving theological framework developed over centuries to answer the most fundamental questions of the human condition: the palpable universality of sin and suffering, the stark reality of death, and the perceived necessity of divine redemption. The doctrine posits that the human predicament is not merely the sum of individual misdeeds but stems from a primordial catastrophe, a fall from a state of grace that has left an indelible mark on human nature itself.  

This report will argue that the doctrine of Original Sin is a pivotal key to understanding the theological, philosophical, and cultural development of the West. Its architecture was not revealed fully formed but was constructed piece by piece, with its blueprints drawn from contested interpretations of scripture, its foundations laid in the crucible of early Church controversies, and its structure repeatedly modified by scholastic philosophers, Protestant reformers, and modern thinkers. To comprehend this doctrine is to trace the history of how a civilization has grappled with its own shadow. This analysis will proceed by first establishing the foundational concepts of the doctrine as defined by the Catholic Church, including the loss of “original holiness” and the enduring wound of “concupiscence.” It will then excavate the doctrine’s historical layers, from the pre-Augustinian musings of St. Irenaeus to the watershed debate between Augustine and Pelagius that created a lasting schism between the Western and Eastern Churches. Following this, the report will examine the scholastic systematization by Thomas Aquinas, the radical intensification of the doctrine by the Protestant Reformers, and the Catholic Church’s definitive response at the Council of Trent. The investigation will then broaden to a comparative landscape, contrasting the Christian diagnosis with the distinct anthropologies of Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism. Finally, it will assess the doctrine’s enduring and often troubling legacy in philosophy, psychology, politics, literature, and art, concluding with an exploration of modern attempts to reinterpret this ancient teaching in an age of science and existentialism. Through this exhaustive analysis, Original Sin will be revealed not as a static dogma but as a dynamic and powerful narrative that continues to shape the Western understanding of what it means to be human.

Section I: Foundational Concepts: Defining the “Hereditary Stain”

To understand the intricate theological debates that span nearly two millennia, one must first establish a precise vocabulary. The doctrine of Original Sin, particularly within the Catholic tradition that gave it its most systematic form, is not a single idea but a constellation of interrelated concepts: a lost state of perfection, a transmitted state of deprivation, and an enduring internal conflict. These concepts are not, as is often assumed, stated verbatim in scripture; rather, they are the product of a prolonged theological reflection that sought to build a coherent system from biblical narratives and apostolic teachings. The resulting structure is a theological construct of remarkable complexity, built upon a specific interpretation of key biblical texts that has proven both profoundly influential and perpetually controversial.

1.1 The State of Original Holiness and Justice: The Lost Inheritance

The doctrine of Original Sin is fundamentally a doctrine of loss. To grasp the nature of the “fallen state,” one must first comprehend the state from which humanity is said to have fallen. The Catechism of the Catholic Church refers to this primordial condition as one of “original holiness and justice”. This was not a primitive or undeveloped state but a condition of profound harmony and supernatural endowment, a gift from God rather than an inherent property of human nature.  

Original Holiness refers specifically to the state of intimate friendship with God. Adam and Eve were created to “share in… divine life,” a condition of sanctifying grace that placed them in direct communion with their Creator. This relationship was the source of their happiness and the foundation of all other harmonies they enjoyed.  

Flowing from this holiness was the state of Original Justice, which describes a fourfold harmony:

1. Inner Harmony: The human person was perfectly ordered within. The soul had complete mastery over the body’s powers, and reason governed the passions without struggle. This state was characterized by a freedom from   concupiscence, the inclination to sin that would later become a central feature of the fallen condition.  
2. Harmony between Man and Woman: The relationship between the first man and woman was one of perfect communion, free from the lust and domination that would mar their relations after the Fall.  
3. Harmony with Creation: The natural world was not hostile but was a paradise in which work was not a toilsome burden but a joyful collaboration with God in perfecting creation.  
4. Harmony with Oneself: This state included preternatural gifts, such as bodily immortality and freedom from suffering and death.  

The loss of this integral state of grace and harmony is the essence of the tragedy described in the doctrine of Original Sin. It is the deprivation of this inheritance that constitutes the “stain” passed down through the generations.

1.2 The Nature of the Fall: A Contracted State, Not a Committed Act

A crucial distinction in Catholic theology is that Original Sin, in Adam’s descendants, is not a personal sin in the same way as an actual sin. It is not an act that individuals commit but a state they contract or are born into. The Catechism defines it as a “deprivation of original holiness and justice”. It is a “hereditary stain,” a condition of spiritual death that is transmitted by propagation to all of humanity.  

The precise mechanism of this transmission remains a theological mystery. The Church teaches that Adam and Eve received original holiness and justice not only for themselves but as a gift to be passed on to all of human nature. When they sinned, they could no longer transmit what they themselves had lost. Consequently, they passed on a human nature that was wounded and deprived of its original gifts. Therefore, while it is called “sin,” it is so only in an analogical sense; it does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. This distinction is vital, as it separates the state of being born into a fallen condition from the personal culpability of the sins one later commits freely.  

1.3 Concupiscence: The Enduring Inclination to Sin

The most immediate and experiential consequence of Original Sin is concupiscence. Following the loss of original justice, the harmony of the soul’s faculties was shattered. The will, no longer perfectly ordered to God, lost its serene control over the passions. The result is concupiscence: the enduring “inclination to evil”. The  

Catechism explains that it “unsettles man’s moral faculties and, without being in itself an offence, inclines man to commit sins”.  

In Catholic teaching, this inclination is a wound, not a sin in itself. It is the “tinder for sin” (fomes peccati), which remains even after baptism has erased the guilt of Original Sin. This persistence of concupiscence means that the Christian life is a constant “spiritual battle”. Sin occurs only when the will freely consents to the disordered desires that arise from concupiscence. This nuanced position—that the inclination is not itself sin—would become a major point of contention with the Protestant Reformers, who tended to identify concupiscence directly with Original Sin.  

1.4 Scriptural Foundations: An Exegesis of Genesis 3 and Romans 5

The entire doctrinal edifice of Original Sin rests upon a theological interpretation that connects two key biblical passages: the narrative of the Fall in Genesis 3 and the theological argument of St. Paul in Romans 5. The doctrine does not emerge directly from either text alone but from the synthesis of the two.

The account in Genesis 3 provides the foundational narrative. It describes the disobedience of Adam and Eve in eating the forbidden fruit, their subsequent shame, their fear of God, and their expulsion from the Garden of Eden. The consequences are immediate and dire: toil in work, pain in childbirth, conflict between the sexes, and the entry of death into human history. This story became the “cornerstone for the Church’s reflection on the human condition”. However, it is noteworthy what the text does  

not say. It never uses the terms “sin,” “guilt,” “Fall,” or “Original Sin,” nor does it explicitly state that the spiritual state of the first parents would be transmitted to all their descendants.  

It is Romans 5:12–21 that provides the theological framework for universalizing the effects of Adam’s act. This is the “classical text” for the doctrine. Here, St. Paul creates a powerful parallel between Adam and Christ. He argues that “sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned”. He contrasts Adam’s “one trespass,” which “led to condemnation for all,” with Christ’s “one act of righteousness,” which “leads to justification and life for all”. This passage explicitly links the sin of one individual to the condition of all humanity.  

The development of the formal doctrine of Original Sin is a direct result of reading the narrative of Genesis 3 through the theological lens provided by Romans 5. The story of the first sin is interpreted as the peccatum originans (originating sin) that brought about the universal state of sinfulness Paul describes. Yet, this synthesis is not without its own interpretive difficulties. The crucial clause in Romans 5:12, “because all sinned” (  

eph’ hō pantes hēmarton), is notoriously ambiguous and has been “fiercely contested” throughout history. Does it mean all sinned by personally imitating Adam’s example, or that all somehow participated in Adam’s original act? The answer to this question would become the very fault line upon which the Christian understanding of Original Sin would fracture. The doctrine, therefore, is not a simple reading of the Bible but a complex theological construction, and its entire history is a history of the struggle to interpret and systematize the profound but ambiguous connection between these two foundational texts.  

Section II: The Patristic Crucible: Forging the Doctrine in the Early Church

The first five centuries of Christianity were a formative period for the doctrine of Original Sin. It did not emerge as a fully articulated dogma but developed gradually from a collection of related ideas concerning sin, death, and human freedom. Early Christian thought was diverse, but it was the monumental clash between two fifth-century theologians, Augustine of Hippo and the British monk Pelagius, that would forge the definitive Western doctrine and simultaneously reveal a deep and lasting divergence with the Christian East. This controversy was not merely an academic dispute; it was a battle for the very soul of Christian anthropology, the outcome of which was profoundly shaped by historical context, theological priorities, and a single, fateful mistranslation of scripture.

2.1 Pre-Augustinian Currents: Irenaeus and the Theology of Recapitulation

Prior to the fifth century, no specific, universally accepted doctrine of Original Sin existed. The early Church Fathers grappled with the implications of Adam’s transgression, but their focus often remained on personal responsibility. Justin Martyr, for instance, wrote of humanity being “fallen to the power of death” since Adam, yet emphasized that “each man committing evil by his own fault”.  

The most significant pre-Augustinian contribution came from St. Irenaeus of Lyon in the late second century. In his work against Gnosticism, Irenaeus proposed a “theodicy of soul-making.” He viewed Adam and Eve not as perfect beings who fell, but as immature children created in God’s image with the potential to grow into God’s likeness. Their sin was an act of youthful disobedience, a necessary misstep in the long process of human maturation. This perspective presents the Fall less as a tragic condemnation and more as a “hopeful development”.  

Central to Irenaeus’s thought was the concept of recapitulation (anakephalaiōsis). He saw Christ as the “New Adam” who lives through every stage of human existence, from infancy to old age, thereby sanctifying it. Christ systematically undoes Adam’s failure, contrasting Adam’s disobedience concerning a tree with his own perfect obedience to death on the “wood of a tree”. This framework emphasizes restoration and growth over inherited guilt. Nevertheless, Irenaeus laid some of the groundwork for later, more rigid doctrines. He spoke of Adam’s children being “begotten in the same captivity” to sin and death, acknowledging an inherited consequence, even if he did not systematize it into a doctrine of guilt.  

2.2 The Watershed Moment: Augustine vs. Pelagius

The fifth-century debate between Augustine and Pelagius was the crucible in which the Western doctrine of Original Sin was definitively forged. The controversy was sparked by Pelagius’s reaction to what he perceived as moral laxity, which he attributed to a theology that overemphasized grace at the expense of human effort.  

Pelagius’s Position was one of radical human autonomy. He taught that:

• Adam’s sin harmed only himself and served as a bad example, not a transmitted stain.  
• Humans are born in the same neutral state as Adam before his sin, with a free will that is fully capable of choosing good and living a sinless life without the absolute necessity of God’s internal grace.  
• Grace, for Pelagius, was primarily an external aid: the gift of creation, the revelation of the Law, and the example of Christ. It was illumination, not an inner transformation of the will.  
• Consequently, infant baptism was not for the remission of a non-existent original sin but for entry into the Church.

Augustine’s Response, developed over years of intense debate, became the cornerstone of Western theology. Horrified by a teaching that he believed made Christ’s redemption superfluous, Augustine argued that:

• All of humanity was seminally present in the “loins of Adam” and thus participated in his sin. This concept, known as Augustinian Realism, meant that humanity inherits not just the consequences of Adam’s sin, but his very guilt.  
• As a result, the entire human race is a massa damnata, a “mass of perdition” or “condemned crowd,” justly deserving of damnation from birth.  
• The human will is not free but is in bondage to sin (liberum arbitrium captivatum). After the Fall, humanity is not able not to sin (non posse non peccare). The will can only choose evil unless it is liberated by God’s grace.  
• This grace is not merely helpful but absolutely necessary and irresistible (gratia irresistibilis). It is a divine intervention that liberates and reorients the will toward God.  
• Therefore, infant baptism is essential for washing away the inherited guilt of Original Sin and delivering the child from damnation.  

A critical factor in the formulation of Augustine’s doctrine was a faulty Latin translation of Romans 5:12. The original Greek text states that death spread to all “because” (eph’ ho) all sinned. The Old Latin Vulgate, which Augustine used, translated this as in quo, meaning “in whom.” This led Augustine to the powerful but exegetically flawed conclusion that all of humanity sinned “in whom”—that is, in Adam. This linguistic error is not a minor detail; it is the very hinge on which the Western concept of inherited  

guilt turns.

Augustine’s powerful rhetoric and theological genius, combined with the political circumstances of the time, led to the triumph of his position in the West. Pelagianism was formally condemned as a heresy at the Council of Carthage in 418 and the ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431. Augustine’s formulation became the non-negotiable starting point for all subsequent Western theology on sin, grace, and salvation.  

2.3 The Divergent Path: Ancestral Sin in the Eastern Orthodox Tradition

The Christian East, which read the scriptures in their original Greek and was not embroiled in the Pelagian controversy to the same degree, never adopted the specifics of the Augustinian framework. The Eastern Orthodox Church developed a parallel but distinct doctrine known as  

Ancestral Sin (propatorikó amártēma).  

The core of the Orthodox teaching is that humanity inherits the consequences of Adam’s sin, but not his personal guilt. The primary inheritance is mortality—death—and the corruption of human nature that follows from it. The human condition is seen as a spiritual “disease” or “sickness” passed down through the generations, which makes sinning inevitable but for which individuals are not born culpable. The focus is on divine compassion for a suffering humanity rather than divine wrath against a guilty humanity.  

This view stems from a direct reading of the Greek of Romans 5:12, understanding eph’ ho to mean “because” all people subsequently commit their own personal sins in a world now conditioned by death and corruption. Each person bears responsibility only for their own actions. The expulsion from the Garden, in this view, was an act of divine mercy to prevent humanity from becoming “immortal in sin”. The remedy is not primarily a legal acquittal from inherited guilt but a therapeutic process of healing and deification (  

theosis), whereby the believer partakes in the divine nature through Christ.

The divergence between the Western “Original Sin” and the Eastern “Ancestral Sin” is therefore not a late development but a foundational split rooted in the earliest centuries of the Church. It demonstrates how a specific historical controversy and a critical linguistic difference could set the two great halves of Christendom on profoundly different theological trajectories, shaping their distinct understandings of human nature, salvation, and God himself.

Section III: Scholastic Refinements and Reformation Ruptures

Following the Augustinian settlement in the West, the doctrine of Original Sin became a central pillar of theological reflection. The Middle Ages saw its systematic integration into a comprehensive philosophical framework, while the Protestant Reformation witnessed its radical intensification. This period of intense theological activity, from the high scholasticism of the 13th century to the confessional battles of the 16th, was defined by a deepening engagement with Augustine’s legacy. The central disputes were not over the existence of a fallen human nature, but over its precise effects on the human will and the status of the sinful inclination, or concupiscence, that persists even in the life of the redeemed.

3.1 The Scholastic Synthesis: Thomas Aquinas

The great achievement of medieval scholasticism was the synthesis of Christian theology with the rediscovered philosophy of Aristotle. In the 13th century, St. Thomas Aquinas undertook this task for the doctrine of Original Sin, providing a nuanced and systematic framework that would become standard for Catholic theology.  

Drawing on Aristotle’s categories, Aquinas defined Original Sin as a “habit” (habitus). He clarified that this was not a habit in the modern sense of a repeated action, but in the philosophical sense of a stable disposition of a complex nature. Original Sin is a “corrupt habit” or an “inordinate disposition of nature” (habitus corruptus), analogous to a chronic illness that disrupts the body’s natural equilibrium.  

Aquinas further analyzed this corrupt habit by distinguishing its two core elements:

• The Formal Element: This is the essence of Original Sin, which he identified as the privation of original justice. It is the loss of the will’s proper subordination to God, the severing of the relationship that once ordered the entire human person.  
• The Material Element: This consists of the consequences that flow from this privation. With the will no longer ordered to God, all the other powers of the soul become disordered. This disorder, this inordinate turning of the appetites toward “mutable good,” is what Aquinas identifies as concupiscence.  

In this schema, concupiscence is the material manifestation of the formal loss of grace. Aquinas’s synthesis preserved the core of Augustine’s thought while providing it with a more precise philosophical vocabulary. He affirmed that human nature was profoundly “wounded” by the Fall—subject to ignorance, suffering, death, and an inclination to evil—but, crucially, he maintained that it was not “totally corrupted”. For Aquinas, free will was weakened and impaired, but not utterly destroyed.  

3.2 The Reformation Intensification: Luther, Calvin, and Total Depravity

The 16th-century Protestant Reformers, particularly Martin Luther and John Calvin, saw themselves not as innovators but as restorers of a pure Augustinian theology which they believed had been compromised by scholastic philosophy. They took Augustine’s teachings on the fallen human state and radicalized them into the doctrine of  

Total Depravity.  

This doctrine does not assert that humans are as evil as they could possibly be. Rather, it teaches that sin has corrupted every part of human nature—the intellect is darkened, the emotions are perverted, and the will is in bondage. As a result of the Fall, human beings are rendered completely unable, apart from the sovereign grace of God, to perform any act that is genuinely good or pleasing to God. Even their best works are tainted by sinful motives.  

A cornerstone of this view was the bondage of the will. Luther, in his work of the same name, argued forcefully that the human will is not free to choose between good and evil. It is a slave to sin and can only choose evil unless it is irresistibly captured and freed by divine grace.  

The most significant point of departure from the scholastic view, and the one that would define the Reformation conflict on this issue, was the status of concupiscence. For Luther and Calvin, the disordered desire and inclination to evil that remains in a person after baptism is not merely a “tinder” for sin; it is truly and properly sin. This led to the classic Lutheran understanding of the Christian as  

simul justus et peccator—simultaneously justified in the eyes of God through faith in Christ, yet remaining fundamentally a sinner in their own nature. This perspective necessitates a view of salvation where Christ’s righteousness is not infused to heal human nature but is imputed or legally credited to the believer, covering their persistent sinfulness like a cloak.  

3.3 The Catholic Counter-Reformation: The Decrees of the Council of Trent

The Catholic Church’s response to the Protestant challenge was articulated definitively at the Council of Trent (1545–1563). The Council’s decrees on Original Sin were meticulously crafted to reaffirm traditional teaching and to condemn specific Protestant formulations with anathemas.  

Trent confirmed the core tenets of the Western tradition: that Adam lost original holiness and justice for all humanity, that this sin is transmitted by propagation and not by imitation, and that the sole remedy is the merit of Christ applied through the sacrament of baptism, which is necessary even for infants.  

The Council’s most crucial clarification came in its fifth decree, which directly addressed the nature of concupiscence. It explicitly rejected the Reformation view. Trent declared that while concupiscence “comes from sin and inclines to sin,” it is not “truly and properly sin” in the baptized. It remains as an “incentive to sin” left for the believer’s spiritual struggle, and it “cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ”.  

This decree solidified the fundamental distinction between the Catholic and Protestant anthropologies. By defining concupiscence as a non-sinful wound, the Council preserved a theological framework for infused grace, sanctification, and genuine human cooperation in the process of salvation. It affirmed that in baptism, the guilt of Original Sin is completely remitted, and while its consequences—including the struggle with concupiscence—remain, the believer is truly made a new creation, capable of growing in holiness.  

3.4 The Via Media: Anglican and Methodist Perspectives

Emerging from the crucible of the Reformation, other traditions charted a middle way (via media) between the positions of Rome and the continental Reformers.

Anglicanism, as defined in its foundational Thirty-Nine Articles of 1571, reflects this mediating tendency. Article IX defines Original Sin as the inherent “fault and corruption of the Nature of every man,” which leaves humanity “very far gone from original righteousness” and naturally “inclined to evil”. On the critical question of concupiscence, the Article states that this “infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated” and that it “hath of itself the nature of sin” (  

rationem peccati). This language is notably stronger than Trent’s and leans closer to the Reformed perspective, though it avoids the most uncompromising language of total depravity.  

Methodism, originating as a revival movement within the Church of England, developed its own distinct theological emphasis under John Wesley. Wesley held a strong view of humanity’s fallen state, affirming a form of total depravity. However, he departed significantly from the Calvinist interpretation by introducing the doctrine of  

prevenient grace. Wesley taught that while Adam’s sin resulted in a corrupt nature for all, God’s grace “goes before” salvation and is extended to every human being. This grace overcomes the bondage of the will to the extent that it restores a measure of freedom, making it possible for individuals to respond to the gospel call. This “freed will” makes humans genuinely responsible for their choice to accept or reject salvation. Furthermore, Wesley distinguished between the inherited corrupt nature and inherited guilt, teaching that “no person was condemned to hell because of Original Sin alone,” but only for their own actual, committed sins.  

Section IV: A Comparative Theological Landscape

The doctrine of Original Sin, in its various Christian formulations, offers a distinct diagnosis of the human condition. It posits a problem that is ontological in nature—a fundamental flaw in what human beings are, inherited from a single primordial event. This stands in stark contrast to the diagnoses offered by other major world religions, which tend to locate the fundamental human problem in the realms of behavior, psychology, or cognition. Examining these different frameworks reveals the unique contours of the Christian narrative of fall and redemption and highlights how a tradition’s anthropology—its understanding of human nature—determines its soteriology, or its proposed path to salvation and fulfillment.

Table 1: Comparative Doctrines of the Human Condition

Export to Sheets

4.1 Judaism: The Struggle of Inclinations (Yetzer Hara and Yetzer Tov)

Judaism fundamentally rejects the notion of an inherited, ontological stain or guilt resulting from Adam’s transgression. The cornerstone of Jewish anthropology is personal accountability, a principle explicitly articulated in the Hebrew Bible: “The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son” (Ezekiel 18:20).  

Instead of a fallen nature, rabbinic thought posits that every human being is created with two competing inclinations: the yetzer hara (the “evil inclination”) and the yetzer hatov (the “good inclination”). The  

yetzer hara is not a demonic force or a consequence of a primordial fall. It is understood as a natural, God-given drive necessary for life itself—encompassing desires for food, security, pleasure, and procreation. It is “evil” only in the sense that, if left unchecked and unchanneled, it can lead to transgression. Indeed, one rabbinic midrash humorously recounts how the sages once managed to imprison the  

yetzer hara, only to find that the entire world ground to a halt—no one built houses, married, or even tended to their animals—forcing them to release it.  

The human drama, therefore, is not about overcoming a corrupted nature but about managing these two inclinations. The yetzer hatov, which is said to develop later in life (at the age of accountability), provides the moral and spiritual intelligence needed to guide the powerful drives of the yetzer hara toward constructive ends. The primary tool for this task is the Torah, which serves as the “antidote” to the poison of an untamed inclination. When a person sins, the remedy is not a sacrament to remove a hereditary stain, but  

teshuvah—a deeply personal process of repentance, return, and reconciliation with God. The problem is behavioral and relational, and so is the solution.  

4.2 Islam: The Primordial Purity of Fitra

The Islamic understanding of human nature is, in many ways, the direct antithesis of the doctrine of Original Sin. Islam teaches that every human being is born in a state of Fitra, an innate purity and goodness, a primordial nature that is intrinsically inclined toward recognizing the oneness of God (Tawhid). A famous hadith (saying of the Prophet Muhammad) states, “Every child is born upon the fitrah, but his parents make him a Jew, a Christian, or a Magian”. This means that the natural human state is one of submission to God (  

Islam), and deviation from this state is the result of external corruption, not internal corruption.

The Quranic account of Adam and Eve acknowledges their act of disobedience, but with crucial differences from the Christian interpretation. Their sin was a personal mistake, a moment of forgetfulness for which they immediately repented and were fully forgiven by a merciful God. Their act had no lasting consequences for the nature of their descendants. There is no concept of a transmitted stain or inherited guilt; every soul is born with a clean slate and is accountable only for its own actions. The Quran states, “No bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another” (35:18).  

The fundamental human problem in Islam is not a depraved nature but ghaflah (forgetfulness) and pride, which cause individuals to stray from their pure Fitra. Sin is a deviation, not an innate condition. The path back to God is therefore not through a vicarious atonement for an inherited debt, but through  

Tawbah (repentance) and a conscious, willful act of returning to the submission to God that is already inscribed on the human heart.  

4.3 Buddhism: The Diagnosis of Suffering (Dukkha)

Buddhism approaches the human condition from a perspective that is neither theological nor moralistic in the Abrahamic sense, but rather psychological and existential. The starting point of the Buddha’s teaching, encapsulated in the Four Noble Truths, is not sin but Dukkha. While often translated as “suffering,”  

Dukkha encompasses a broader range of experiences, including pain, stress, anxiety, and a fundamental sense of unsatisfactoriness inherent in all conditioned existence.  

The Second Noble Truth identifies the origin (samudāya) of Dukkha. This origin is not a primordial act of disobedience against a creator God, but tanha—craving, thirst, or attachment—which itself is rooted in avidya, or ignorance of the true nature of reality (specifically, the impermanence, non-self, and unsatisfactoriness of all phenomena). We suffer because we cling to things that are by their nature impermanent, seeking lasting satisfaction where none can be found.  

The problem, therefore, is not a moral stain requiring divine forgiveness, but a deep-seated cognitive and psychological error. The solution, outlined in the Third and Fourth Noble Truths, is the cessation (nirodha) of this craving, which leads to the state of Nirvana, an extinguishing of the fires of greed, hatred, and delusion. This is achieved not through faith in a divine savior or adherence to a divine law, but through a rigorous and methodical path of self-discipline, meditation, and wisdom known as the Noble Eightfold Path. The Buddhist path is one of radical self-reliance and mental purification, aimed at waking up from ignorance rather than being forgiven for sin.  

This comparative analysis reveals the profound distinctiveness of the doctrine of Original Sin. While Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism locate the human problem in the realms of choice, knowledge, or perception—and thus propose remedies based on law, submission, or enlightenment—the Christian doctrine posits a more radical, ontological flaw. It argues that the problem is not primarily what we do or what we think, but what we are by nature. This unique diagnosis logically necessitates a unique solution: not simply a new law or a new teaching, but a divine intervention powerful enough to remake human nature itself—the redemption offered in the person of Jesus Christ.

Section V: The Enduring Legacy and Modern Re-evaluations

The doctrine of Original Sin has exerted a formative influence far beyond the confines of systematic theology. It has become one of the foundational myths of Western culture, providing a powerful, though often deeply problematic, lens for interpreting the human experience. Its assumptions about human nature have shaped political theories, inspired literary masterpieces, and left an indelible mark on the individual psyche. In the modern era, as literal belief in the Genesis narrative has waned, the doctrine has faced trenchant philosophical critiques and has been subject to radical reinterpretations, yet its underlying structure continues to resonate in both religious and secular thought.

5.1 Philosophical and Ethical Critiques

Since the Enlightenment, the doctrine of Original Sin has been subjected to intense philosophical scrutiny, primarily centered on its apparent conflict with fundamental principles of justice and moral responsibility.

The most persistent critique targets the concepts of collective guilt and hereditary punishment. The notion that an individual can be born morally culpable and deserving of damnation for a sin committed by a distant ancestor strikes many as a profound violation of justice. Legal and ethical systems are typically founded on the principle of individual responsibility, where guilt is contingent upon personal intent and action (  

mens rea). The doctrine of Original Sin appears to discard this principle, holding individuals accountable for a state they did not choose and a fault antecedent to their own existence. As the prophet Ezekiel declared in a passage often cited against the doctrine, it seems fundamentally unjust for the child to bear the iniquity of the parent.  

The doctrine also poses a significant challenge to theodicy, the attempt to reconcile the existence of an all-good, all-powerful God with the reality of evil and suffering. While Original Sin is often presented as a Christian answer to the problem of evil—explaining that suffering is a just consequence of human sin—it raises as many questions as it answers. Why would a perfect and omniscient God create beings with the capacity to commit a sin so catastrophic that it would corrupt their entire lineage? If God is omnipotent, could He not have created a world with free creatures who would not fall? The logical problem of evil, which questions the compatibility of a perfect God with any evil, is not necessarily solved but is perhaps intensified by a doctrine that traces all evil back to a single, divinely permitted event.  

Finally, the doctrine, especially in its more radical Augustinian and Calvinist forms, creates a deep tension with the concept of human free will. If human nature is totally depraved and the will is in bondage to sin, unable to choose the good, then in what sense are individuals morally responsible for their actions?. If sin is a necessity of our fallen nature, it seems to be a category error to also describe it as a culpable choice. This paradox has been a central and unresolved tension throughout the history of Western theology.  

5.2 The Psychological Imprint: Guilt, Shame, and the Self

The doctrine of Original Sin has had a profound and often damaging psychological impact on the Western conception of the self. The teaching that one is born inherently flawed, “dead in sin,” or “totally depraved” can foster a deep-seated sense of worthlessness, shame, and self-alienation. It frames the human person not as innately good or even neutral, but as fundamentally broken and corrupt from the outset.  

This can lead to a pervasive and debilitating sense of guilt. The individual is burdened not only by guilt for personal transgressions but also by a foundational guilt for their very nature. This can manifest as scrupulosity, anxiety, and obsessive-compulsive patterns of thought and behavior, where every desire and impulse is scrutinized for its sinful potential. Morality becomes a high-stakes performance aimed at proving one’s worthiness in the face of an innate unworthiness.  

This psychological framework creates a powerful dependency dynamic. The doctrine first “hijacks natural safety” by defining the self as inherently bad and in mortal danger, and then offers a single, exclusive solution: adherence to the religious system that made the diagnosis. This can trap the individual in a closed loop of fear, dependency, and relief, making it extraordinarily difficult to develop an autonomous sense of self-worth grounded in anything other than external validation from the religious authority. As one analysis notes, the deeply internalized idea that “there is something wrong with me” has become a scar on the Western psyche, fueling a relentless search for a “fix” that has found a modern, secular expression in the multi-billion-dollar self-help industry.  

5.3 Cultural Manifestations: Politics, Literature, and Art

The influence of Original Sin has radiated throughout Western culture, providing a foundational narrative for understanding power, tragedy, and beauty.

In political theory, the doctrine’s pessimistic anthropology has been used to justify vastly different forms of governance. For authoritarian thinkers like Martin Luther, Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, and Joseph de Maistre, the inherent sinfulness and depravity of humanity proved that people were “too wicked to be free” and thus required the coercive, restraining hand of an absolute monarch or a strong state to maintain order. Conversely, a more moderate Augustinian realism about human fallibility and the lust for power deeply influenced the architects of American democracy. The U.S. Constitution’s system of checks and balances, separation of powers, and federalism is predicated not on an optimistic view of human nature, but on the sober recognition that power corrupts and that human ambition must be set to counteract ambition.  

In literature, the Fall of Man is arguably one of the central myths of the Western canon.

• John Milton’s Paradise Lost is the most monumental literary exploration of the theme. The epic poem dramatizes the entire cosmic narrative, from Satan’s rebellion to Adam and Eve’s temptation and expulsion, grappling profoundly with the theological paradoxes of free will, divine foreknowledge, and the concept of the felix culpa or “happy fault”—the idea that the Fall, while tragic, ultimately allowed for a greater manifestation of God’s grace and love.  
• William Shakespeare’s tragedies often function as powerful allegories of the Fall. Macbeth, in particular, charts the story of a noble man who, through a single act of transgression born of ambition and temptation, unleashes a spiral of sin, guilt, and alienation that destroys not only himself but the entire political and natural order around him. His descent into a meaningless world where life is “a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing” is a secularized depiction of the spiritual death that follows the rejection of the moral order.  
• Countless other authors, from Nathaniel Hawthorne in The Scarlet Letter to W. H. Auden in The Age of Anxiety, have explored the enduring themes of innate human fallibility, hidden guilt, and the elusive quest for redemption that are the hallmarks of the Original Sin narrative.  

In art, the Fall became a pivotal subject for Renaissance and Baroque masters, who used it to explore new ideas about the human form, theology, and psychology.

• Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel Ceiling features the iconic panel of The Fall and Expulsion from Paradise. In a single, continuous narrative, he masterfully contrasts the prelapsarian and postlapsarian states. To the left of the Tree of Knowledge, Adam and Eve are depicted as luminous, graceful, and idealized figures, representing the perfection of original justice. To the right, after the sin, they are transformed into heavy, cowering, and shame-filled beings, driven out into a barren wasteland by a wrathful angel. The visual shift from buoyant beauty to burdened ugliness is a powerful theological statement on the devastating consequences of the Fall.  
• Albrecht Dürer’s 1504 engraving, Adam and Eve, is a masterpiece of Renaissance symbolism. The two figures are rendered with the idealized proportions of classical statues like the Apollo Belvedere, reflecting the humanist celebration of the perfection of the human form before the Fall. Surrounding them, however, are animals symbolizing the four humors or temperaments: the choleric cat, the sanguine rabbit, the phlegmatic ox, and the melancholic elk. According to medieval tradition, these humors were in perfect equilibrium in the state of original justice, but the Fall upset this balance, afflicting humanity with disordered passions and psychological imbalance.  

5.4 Modern Theology: Reinterpreting the Fall

In the face of modern science and philosophy, many contemporary theologians have sought to preserve the existential truth of the doctrine while jettisoning its literal-historical claims.

The scientific consensus on human evolution presents a significant challenge to the traditional narrative of a historical fall from a state of perfection by a single ancestral couple. In response, some theologians have proposed that “Adam and Eve” should be understood as archetypal figures representing all of humanity, or that the “Fall” occurred when God endowed a population of hominids with immortal souls and moral consciousness. Others reinterpret Original Sin in evolutionary terms, seeing it as a theological name for the selfish, survival-oriented instincts (aggression, greed, lust) that humanity has inherited from its pre-human ancestors—impulses that were once necessary for survival but are now in conflict with our spiritual aspirations.  

Perhaps the most influential modern approach has been to read the doctrine existentially or metaphorically. Thinkers like Søren Kierkegaard, Paul Tillich, and Reinhold Niebuhr have interpreted the story of the Fall not as a historical event that happened “back then,” but as a profound myth that describes the universal human condition “right now”. In this view, the “Fall” is a symbol for the existential leap every individual makes from the unconscious innocence of childhood into the world of freedom, knowledge, and responsibility. Original Sin becomes a description of human alienation from God, from others, and from our true selves—an alienation born from the anxiety and temptation inherent in our finite freedom. The story of Adam is not the story of a single ancestor; it is the story of every person.  

Section VI: Conclusion: The Persistent Relevance of a “Happy Fault”

The doctrine of Original Sin, traced from its ambiguous scriptural origins through its patristic forging, scholastic refinement, Reformation rupture, and modern re-evaluation, reveals itself as a theological concept of immense power and complexity. It is a doctrine born of paradox, one that has been used to explain everything from the cry of a newborn infant to the architecture of nations. Its long and contentious history is a testament to the profound human need to make sense of a world characterized by both breathtaking beauty and inexplicable suffering, by a capacity for sublime love and a propensity for devastating evil.

The core tensions that have animated its history remain unresolved. The delicate balance between divine grace and human free will, the ethical quandary of inherited guilt versus personal responsibility, and the interpretive choice between literal history and existential metaphor continue to define the theological landscape. The fundamental split between the Eastern focus on inherited mortality and the Western emphasis on inherited guilt, a division rooted in a single mistranslated preposition, stands as a stark reminder of how the contingencies of history can shape the certainties of faith for millennia.

Yet, despite the formidable philosophical critiques and the challenges posed by modern science, the doctrine’s central insight endures. Whether understood as a literal, transmitted stain or as a powerful symbol of the human condition, Original Sin provides a compelling, if unsettling, diagnosis of our shared experience of alienation, our inner conflict, and our inescapable finitude. It insists that the human problem is not superficial but radical, rooted in the very structure of our being. This pessimistic assessment of human nature has left a dark and often damaging legacy on the Western psyche, fostering guilt, shame, and a sense of inherent worthlessness. It has been wielded as a tool of political and social control, justifying coercion in the name of curbing humanity’s wicked impulses.

However, within the Christian theological framework, this profound pessimism is not the final word. It serves as the necessary prelude to an even more profound hope. The doctrine of Original Sin is, as the Catechism of the Catholic Church states, the “reverse side” of the Good News that Jesus is the Savior. Without the diagnosis of a radical disease, the promise of a radical cure would be unintelligible. It is in this context that the ancient paradox of the  

felix culpa, the “happy fault,” finds its meaning. As the Easter Vigil liturgy of the Catholic Church proclaims, “O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer!”. This startling phrase encapsulates the ultimate meaning and persistent relevance of the doctrine of Original Sin. It is the story of a fall that, in the grand narrative of Christian theology, was necessary to make possible a redemption of even greater glory—a testament to a God whose grace, in the words of St. Paul, is made perfect in weakness.  

[taxopress_termsdisplay id=”2″]

Works cited

1. Firebrand Rewind: Toward a Wesleyan Understanding of ‘Original Sin’, accessed September 16, 2025, https://firebrandmag.com/articles/firebrand-rewind-toward-a-wesleyan-understanding-of-original-sin
2. Original sin | Research Starters – EBSCO, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/original-sin
3. Evolution and Original Sin: Accounting for Evil in the World by Dr. Daryl P. Domning and Dr. Joseph F. Wimmer, accessed September 16, 2025, https://washtheocon.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/EvolutionOriginalSin1-corrected.pdf
4. Catechism of the Catholic Church | Catholic Culture, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/catechism/index.cfm?recnum=1843
5. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Concupiscence – New Advent, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04208a.htm
6. Meaning of Original holiness in Christianity, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.wisdomlib.org/christianity/concept/original-holiness
7. Summary of Catechesis on Original Sin | EWTN, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.ewtn.com/catholicism/library/summary-of-catechesis-on-original-sin-23857
8. Holiness and Justice: What’s the difference? – Doctrinal Homily Outlines, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.doctrinalhomilyoutlines.com/2013/01/holiness-and-justice-whats-the-difference/
9. Original Sin – CatholiCity.com, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.catholicity.com/catechism/original_sin.html
10. Concupiscence – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concupiscence
11. Catechism of the Catholic Church | Catholic Culture, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/catechism/index.cfm?recnum=1872
12. Part One Section Two I. The Creeds Chapter One I Believe In God The Father Article 1 I Believe In God The Father Almighty, Creator Of Heaven And Earth Paragraph 7. The Fall – The Holy See, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.vatican.va/content/catechism/en/part_one/section_two/chapter_one/article_1/paragraph_7_the_fall.html
13. Catechism – 405-409, 418 – The Catholic Cross Reference, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.catholiccrossreference.online/catechism/#!/search/405-409,%20418
14. CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Original Sin – New Advent, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11312a.htm
15. What Is Concupiscence? – Simply Catholic, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.simplycatholic.com/what-is-concupiscence/
16. Concupiscence: Our Inclination To Sin – Simply Catholic, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.simplycatholic.com/concupiscence-our-inclination-to-sin/
17. The Church’s Understanding of Original Sin, Steven Lee, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.piercedhearts.org/purity_heart_morality/original_sin_lee.htm
18. Original sin – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Original_sin
19. From Genesis to Judgment: Original Sin Fully Explained – Logos Bible Software, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.logos.com/grow/hall-original-sin/
20. Original Sin: How Original Is It? Romans 5:12 | Answers in Genesis, accessed September 16, 2025, https://answersingenesis.org/sin/original-sin/how-original-is-it-romans-5-12/
21. The teachings of Irenaeus: Original sin as a hopeful development – The University News, accessed September 16, 2025, https://unewsonline.com/2005/04/theteachingsofirenaeusoriginalsinasahopefuldevelopment/
22. The Unification Doctrine of the Fall and the Writings of Irenaeus of Lyon, accessed September 16, 2025, https://journals.uts.edu/volume-xxiv-2023/348-the-unification-doctrine-of-the-fall-and-the-writings-of-irenaeus-of-lyon
23. Irenaeus – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irenaeus
24. The Origin of Original Sin – The Narrow Path Ministries, accessed September 16, 2025, https://theos.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=147
25. Irenaeus (and others) on original sin – The Hump of the Camel, accessed September 16, 2025, https://potiphar.jongarvey.co.uk/2012/05/17/irenaeus-and-others-on-original-sin/
26. Augustine and the Pelagian Controversy – Tabletalk Magazine, accessed September 16, 2025, https://tabletalkmagazine.com/article/2020/09/augustine-and-the-pelagian-controversy/
27. Augustine’s theology of grace as a response to Pelagius – Students of Scriptures, accessed September 16, 2025, https://studentsofscriptures.com/project/augustines-theology-of-grace-as-a-response-to-pelagius/
28. The Battle of the Will, Part 1: Pelagius and Augustine – The Gospel …, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/battle-will-part-1-pelagius-augustine/
29. Pelagianism – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelagianism
30. AUGUSTINE v PELAGIUS ON ORIGINAL SIN – Didache: Faithful Teaching, accessed September 16, 2025, https://didache.nazarene.org/index.php/regiontheoconf/eurasia-2000/300-eu2000-03-mcgonigle-augustine/file
31. Ancestral Versus Original Sin | St. Mary Orthodox Christian Church …, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.stmaryorthodoxchurch.org/orthodoxy/articles/ancestral_versus_original_sin
32. Original Sin Debunked — Christianity — Dr. Eitan Bar | Bible Scholar, accessed September 16, 2025, https://eitan.bar/articles/original-sin-debunked/
33. The Doctrine of Original Sin (Part 4): Romans 5, I Corinthians 15, Ancestral Sin, and the “Natural” Order of Things – Resurrecting Orthodoxy, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.joeledmundanderson.com/the-doctrine-of-original-sin-part-4-romans-5-i-corinthians-15-ancestral-sin-and-the-natural-order-of-things/
34. How does Orthodox Theology reject original sin and not fall into Pelagianism?, accessed September 16, 2025, https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/103954/how-does-orthodox-theology-reject-original-sin-and-not-fall-into-pelagianism
35. Original/First Sin: As presented by the catholic and orthodox chuches appear to be the same but they both claim otherwise, accessed September 16, 2025, https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/103033/original-first-sin-as-presented-by-the-catholic-and-orthodox-chuches-appear-to
36. What is “Original Sin?’ | Saint George Greek Orthodox Cathedral, accessed September 16, 2025, https://stgeorgegreenville.org/our-faith/catechism/the-ofall/original-sin
37. Humankind & Ancestral Sin – First Century Christian Faith (FCCF), accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.firstcenturycf.org/post/ancestral
38. Thomas Aquinas on Original Sin – reformator: living perspectivally, accessed September 16, 2025, https://redemptiblog.wordpress.com/2016/12/10/thomas-aquinas-on-original-sin/
39. SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: Original sin, as to its essence (Prima …, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.newadvent.org/summa/2082.htm
40. Total depravity – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_depravity
41. The Doctrine of Total Depravity—is it Biblical? – Relearn.org, accessed September 16, 2025, https://relearn.org/the-doctrine-of-total-depravity-is-it-biblical/
42. Can someone explain to me the the Protestant doctrine of “total depravity”? : r/Catholicism, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/nykf0o/can_someone_explain_to_me_the_the_protestant/
43. General Council of Trent: Fifth Session – Papal Encyclicals, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/fifth-session.htm
44. www.papalencyclicals.net, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/fifth-session.htm#:~:text=If%20any%20one%20asserts%2C%20that%20this%20sin%20of%20Adam%2C%E2%80%93,Christ%2C%20who%20hath%20reconciled%20us
45. Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles – Article IX | The North American Anglican, accessed September 16, 2025, https://northamanglican.com/exposition-of-the-thirty-nine-articles-article-ix/
46. The Thirty-Nine Articles – Anglicans Online, accessed September 16, 2025, https://anglicansonline.org/basics/thirty-nine_articles.html
47. Article 9 — Of Original or Birth-sin – Church Society, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.churchsociety.org/resource/article-9-of-original-or-birth-sin/
48. Thirty Nine Articles of Religion | Anglican Communion, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.anglicancommunion.org/media/109014/Thirty-Nine-Articles-of-Religion.pdf
49. Toward a Wesleyan Understanding of ‘Original Sin’ – Firebrand Magazine, accessed September 16, 2025, https://firebrandmag.com/articles/toward-a-wesleyan-understanding-of-original-sin
50. JOHN WESLEY’S CONCEPT OF SIN – Evangelical Theological Society, accessed September 16, 2025, https://etsjets.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/files_JETS-PDFs_5_5-1_BETS_5-1_18-24_Cox.pdf
51. What do we do with Original Sin? – John Meunier, accessed September 16, 2025, https://johnmeunier.wordpress.com/2012/09/01/what-do-we-do-with-original-sin/
52. The concept of Yetzer HaRa : r/Judaism – Reddit, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Judaism/comments/1hau4pe/the_concept_of_yetzer_hara/
53. Some Biblical Considerations on the Doctrine of Original Sin – Project Augustine, accessed September 16, 2025, https://projectaugustine.com/theology/reformed-theology/some-biblical-considerations-on-the-doctrine-of-original-sin/
54. The Birth of the Good Inclination | My Jewish Learning, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-birth-of-the-good-inclination/
55. Yetzer hara – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yetzer_hara
56. How to Overcome our Good and Evil Inclinations: Yetzer ha Tov and Yetzer ha Ra, accessed September 16, 2025, https://free.messianicbible.com/feature/yetzer-ha-ra-yetzer-ha-tov/
57. Yetzer Tov and Yetzer HaRa: Working Together – Congregation Brit Shalom, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.britshalomstatecollege.org/torah-commentaries/2016/11/30/yetzer-tov-and-yetzer-hara-working-together
58. The Fitra and the Innate Goodness of Man – Brighter Kashmir, accessed September 16, 2025, https://brighterkashmir.com/the-fitra-and-the-innate-goodness-of-man
59. Concept Of Fitrah In Islamic Psychology ISIP, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.isip.foundation/concept-of-fitrah-in-islamic-psychology/
60. Fitra – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitra
61. Fitra: Original Virtue Not Original Sin | Davi Barker – Patheos, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.patheos.com/blogs/muslimagorist/2013/08/fitra-original-virtue-not-original-sin/
62. 10 Things Muslims Believe About Sin – Zwemer Center, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.zwemercenter.com/guide/sin-according-to-muslims/
63. Moral Teachings of Islam- Human Nature in Islam – IslamOnline, accessed September 16, 2025, https://islamonline.net/en/moral-teachings-of-islam-human-nature-in-islam/
64. Fitrah: Your Disposition Towards Virtue – Hiba Magazine, accessed September 16, 2025, https://hibamagazine.com/fitrah-your-disposition-towards-virtue/
65. Four Noble Truths – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Noble_Truths
66. Four Noble Truths | Research Starters – EBSCO, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/four-noble-truths
67. Basics of Buddhism – PBS, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.pbs.org/edens/thailand/buddhism.htm
68. The Buddha’s Four Noble Truths: the Cure for Suffering | Philosophy Break, accessed September 16, 2025, https://philosophybreak.com/articles/the-buddha-four-noble-truths-the-cure-for-suffering/
69. The Four Noble Truths | Spirit Rock Meditation Center, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.spiritrock.org/practice-guides/the-four-noble-truths
70. Between Choice and Compulsion: An Examination and … – BearWorks, accessed September 16, 2025, https://bearworks.missouristate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4955&context=theses
71. Original sin, control, and divine blame: some critical reflections on the moderate doctrine of original sin | Religious Studies – Cambridge University Press, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/religious-studies/article/original-sin-control-and-divine-blame-some-critical-reflections-on-the-moderate-doctrine-of-original-sin/624408DE1EA64C1CE130754B137D62E6
72. The Problem of Evil – C.S. Lewis Institute, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.cslewisinstitute.org/resources/the-problem-of-evil/
73. Logical Problem of Evil | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed September 16, 2025, https://iep.utm.edu/evil-log/
74. Problem of evil – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil
75. The Problem of Evil is easily refuted by Platonism and Privatio Boni – Reddit, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/12q5l5b/the_problem_of_evil_is_easily_refuted_by/
76. Is the logical problem of evil still argued? – Philosophy Stack Exchange, accessed September 16, 2025, https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/42579/is-the-logical-problem-of-evil-still-argued
77. Free Will – St Andrews Encyclopaedia of Theology, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.saet.ac.uk/Christianity/FreeWill
78. Original Sin – The Gospel Coalition, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/original-sin/
79. The Psychology of Original Sin and it’s Awful Effects : r/Exvangelical – Reddit, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/Exvangelical/comments/1i6hmlb/the_psychology_of_original_sin_and_its_awful/
80. How original sin led to a western obsession with self-help | Culture …, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/culture/australia-culture-blog/2014/jul/23/how-original-sin-led-to-a-western-obsession-with-self-help
81. The Psychology of Sin – Eternalised, accessed September 16, 2025, https://eternalisedofficial.com/2025/06/18/the-psychology-of-sin/
82. “What Kind of Faith?” The Enlightenment, Politics and Original Sin …, accessed September 16, 2025, https://pastandpresent.org.uk/kind-faith-enlightenment-politics-original-sin/
83. Augustine and Aquinas on Original Sin and the Function of Political Authority – University of Notre Dame, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www3.nd.edu/~pweithma/My%20Papers/Augustine%20and%20Aquinas%20on%20Political%20Authority.pdf
84. Political Realism in St Augustine of Hippo’s Theology of Original Sin, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.wisdomlib.org/journals/7172-political-realism-st-augustine-hippo-s-theology
85. The Holy Land, God’s work or the Original Sin? Symbolic politics and the Founding in American political history – Cambridge Journal of Political Affairs, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.cambridgepoliticalaffairs.co.uk/2025/01/16/symbolic-politics-and-the-founding-in-america/
86. Sin and Innocence Theme Analysis – Paradise Lost – LitCharts, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.litcharts.com/lit/paradise-lost/themes/sin-and-innocence
87. Paradise Lost: Themes | SparkNotes, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.sparknotes.com/poetry/paradiselost/themes/
88. Paradise Lost – Wikipedia, accessed September 16, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise_Lost
89. (PDF) A Thematic and Stylistic Analysis of John Milton’s Paradise Lost – ResearchGate, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/387552169_A_Thematic_and_Stylistic_Analysis_of_John_Milton’s_Paradise_Lost
90. accessed December 31, 1969, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Paradise-Lost-poem-by-Milton
91. Such Terrible Impression: William Shakespeare’s Dramatic Theology of Sin – eScholarship, accessed September 16, 2025, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/69z3n0k7
92. Shakespeare’s Allegory of the Fall of Man: Notes on Macbeth and Christian Artistry, accessed September 16, 2025, https://voegelinview.com/shakespeares-allegory-of-the-fall-of-man-notes-on-macbeth-and-christian-artistry/
93. Shakespeare and The Madness of Sin | Truth and Freedom Therapy (TFT) – WordPress.com, accessed September 16, 2025, https://truthandfreedomireland.wordpress.com/2020/05/08/shakespeare-and-the-madness-of-sin/
94. Original Sin in the Later Auden – The Imaginative Conservative, accessed September 16, 2025, https://theimaginativeconservative.org/2020/08/original-sin-wh-auden-cicero-bruce.html
95. Original Sin – (American Literature – Before 1860) – Vocab … – Fiveable, accessed September 16, 2025, https://library.fiveable.me/key-terms/american-literature-before-1860/original-sin
96. The Fall of Man, by Michelangelo, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.michelangelo.org/the-fall-of-man.jsp
97. What Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel teaches us about God’s creation, woman and man, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2022/11/15/what-michelangelos-sistine-chapel-teaches-us-about-gods-creation-woman-and-man/
98. The Fall of Man (The Fall and Expulsion from Garden of Eden or Adam and Eve) – Michelangelo Paintings for Sale – Contemporary Art, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.contemporary-art.org/Paintings/The-Fall-of-Man-(The-Fall-and-Expulsion-from-Garden-of-Eden-or-Adam-and-Eve)-Works-20501.html
99. Michelangelo’s Sistine Ceiling: Uncovering Its Message – Kelly Bagdanov, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.kellybagdanov.com/2022/09/05/michelangelos-sistine-ceiling-uncovering-its-message/
100. Sistine Chapel | Ceiling, Painting, & Facts | Britannica, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Sistine-Chapel
101. Adam and Eve (The Fall of Man), 1504 – Michael C. Carlos Museum Collections Online, accessed September 16, 2025, https://digitalprojects.carlos.emory.edu/exhibits/show/rivalcuts/item/8879
102. Albrecht Dürer – Adam and Eve – The Metropolitan Museum of Art, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/336222
103. The Fall of Man (Adam and Eve) – MFA Collection – Museum of Fine Arts Boston, accessed September 16, 2025, https://collections.mfa.org/objects/246/the-fall-of-man-adam-and-eve;jsessionid=825B92F318BE925CF7C17EEBEDF36A48
104. Evolution proves that the dominant view among Christians of Original Sin, is false – Reddit, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateAChristian/comments/1jbrp0e/evolution_proves_that_the_dominant_view_among/
105. How do Christians who believe in evolution understand Original Sin?, accessed September 16, 2025, https://christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/78450/how-do-christians-who-believe-in-evolution-understand-original-sin
106. SCIENCE AND ORIGINAL SIN | TIME, accessed September 16, 2025, https://time.com/archive/6729840/science-and-original-sin/
107. Original sin | Definition, Consequences, & Facts | Britannica, accessed September 16, 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/original-sin
108. Part Four: “Broad Church” Existentialism – David Egan Philosophy, accessed September 16, 2025, https://eganphilosophy.com/what-is-existentialism-part-four-broad-church-existentialism/
109. Existentialism – Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, accessed September 16, 2025, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/existentialism/
110. A Primer on Religious Existentialism, Pt. 4: Augustine – The Christian Humanist, accessed September 16, 2025, http://www.christianhumanist.org/2010/07/a-primer-on-religious-existentialism-pt-4-augustine/