Orthodox and Original Sin

[steve_b]

Dear brother Steve,

I can’t speak for the Easterns. When Orientals say Christ had a “fallen human nature,” we mean that it was subject to death and corruption, not that it was sinful.

However, before the fall there was no death and corruption in Adam and Eve because there was no sin in them nor were they prone to sin. They were perfect…true? Sin was in the world but it wasn’t in THEM. There was no such thing as fallen human nature before the fall. The nature Adam and Eve had before the fall is the one Jesus took on.
m:

You say “human nature before the Fall,” but in the Oriental understanding human nature before the Fall was mortal. Before the Fall, man was immortal by Grace, not by nature.

It’s ALL by grace
m:

So, at least from the Oriental perspective, “human nature before the Fall” would mean the same thing as “fallen human nature” - i,e, a nature that is mortal and corruptible, not necessarily a nature that is sinful**.**.

Human nature before the fall by definition is not fallen. Sin was in the world but it was NOT in Adam and Eve. Therefore, death and corruption was NOT in their nature before the fall. AFTER the fall that changed.

scripture talks about human nature BEFORE the fall as good and literally walking with God, vs human nature AFTER the fall where God throws Adam and Eve out of paradise. And their life and their whole existence changes dramatically.
m:

Apparently (and I use the word strongly since I am not sure), the Easterns interpret the phrase “Fallen human nature” much more generally, equating Original Sin and all its effects (whether spiritual or physical) with the phrase “Fallen human nature.” If what I stated is correct (and hopefully brother Joe or another Eastern can advise us), then the Eastern teaching presents some problems with Christology.

Blessings,
Marduk

I too will be interested to see how this conversation develops.

 

[Bluegoat]

That statement highlighted is not correct. Human nature in the beginning was perfect. There was no sin, no death. There was no nature prone to rebelion. Was Adam truly man truly human before the fall? Absolutely. Did he become MORE human, more man, AFTER the fall? NO. I think one could argue he became less of a man. He corrupted what was pristine. As a result, he lost plenty by his fall. And as a result, he could only pass on to us a less than perfect human nature. But that’s NOT the nature Jesus took on. He took on nature that was perfect and remained perfect. He kept man fully man as intended from the beginning.

Jesus ushered in a new Genesis. The new Adam, who is perfect from beginning to end. Just as the 1st Adam should have done. But because of Adam’s rebellion, death entered the world.

No one could take Jesus life. Jesus gave His life freely. He chose to die for us in order to reorder the consequences of Adam’s sin even though He had NO sin of any kind in Himself. And through his resurrection and ascention, His work of reordering is done perfectly.

The highlighted statement is what is in dispute in this question. If human nature is changed by sin, according to the Eastern argument, than that changed nature is what Christ must take on in order to save mankind. They argue that it is incorrect to say that human nature was changed in that way. The arguments being made here are essentially changing the meaning of the term “human nature” and IMO, avoiding the question.

 

[steve_b]

The highlighted statement is what is in dispute in this question. If human nature is changed by sin, according to the Eastern argument, than that changed nature is what Christ must take on in order to save mankind. They argue that it is incorrect to say that human nature was changed in that way. The arguments being made here are essentially changing the meaning of the term “human nature” and IMO, avoiding the question.

I think we need an EO to clarify what they mean by the terms being used.

 

[josephdaniel29]

The highlighted statement is what is in dispute in this question. If human nature is changed by sin, according to the Eastern argument, than that changed nature is what Christ must take on in order to save mankind. They argue that it is incorrect to say that human nature was changed in that way. The arguments being made here are essentially changing the meaning of the term “human nature” and IMO, avoiding the question.

That is correct. We are not speaking of Adam’s nature before the fall, we are speaking of our broken, fallen nature. That is what Christ came to rescue us from and that is what He had to assume.

I also think it’s important to point out in Orthodox thought Adam was not perfect before the fall either. Since God is infinite Adam still had the potential to grow. Adam had the opportunity to grow more and more into perfect love and communion with God but he abandoned that path when he partook of the fruit. That is our great potential as well and Christ’s Incarnation, death and Resurrection reopened the path for us that Adam closed.

Yours in Christ
Joe

 

[Hesychios]

**eum qui non noverat peccatum pro nobis peccatum fecit ut nos efficeremur iustitia Dei in ipso

**For our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin, so that we might become the righteousness of God in him.

 

[steve_b]

That is correct. We are not speaking of Adam’s nature before the fall, we are speaking of our broken, fallen nature. That is what Christ came to rescue us from and that is what He had to assume.

I also think it’s important to point out in Orthodox thought Adam was not perfect before the fall either. Since God is infinite Adam still had the potential to grow. Adam had the opportunity to grow more and more into perfect love and communion with God but he abandoned that path when he partook of the fruit. That is our great potential as well and Christ’s Incarnation, death and Resurrection reopened the path for us that Adam closed.

Yours in Christ
Joe

Adam was created

• without sin
• with original holiness and justice supernatural gifts
• with preternatural gifts newadvent.org/cathen/06553a.htm

All these he lost with his sin not to mention being thrown out of paradise… And he couldn’t pass on what he no longer had.