# Who is responsible for the original sin? **URL:** \ **Category:** Philosophy of Religion\ **Created:** [May 14, 2026, 9:39pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003 "2026-05-14T21:39:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 6:42pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/21 "2026-05-15T18:42:52Z")
> [@Corvus](#): > > A human person sounds confusing. Is there other types of persons? > For example, God person and dog person or cat person? -surely that doesn’t sound correct or making sense. > > I was under impression God is not person. God is **the** unique and special existence with the properties. > > Your stance seems unclear in differentiating between God and person. A person can refer to different entities, such as humans, God, etc. > [@Corvus](#): > > Do you mean the original Bible OT and NT? or are they commentaries about the Bible ? I mean a few books of the Old and New Testaments. > [@Corvus](#): > > I **was asking you** if you think it would be reasonable for humans ask whether God is responsible for his actions on humans, if God has all the qualities which are out of human world and understanding. > > It is far too early stage for me to agree or disagree on anything at this point. Well, God is all-powerful, so He can create a reality in which one cannot sin. ---
**Author:** ![BitterCrank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/dfb087/32.png) [@BitterCrank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/BitterCrank)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 6:42pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/22 "2026-05-15T18:42:57Z")
That’s right. Paul and Augustine. Original sin is not a Jewish concept. It’s a peculiar feature of Christianity. ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 6:46pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/23 "2026-05-15T18:46:59Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Romans 5:12 Augustine is usually credited as the originator of the term ‘original sin’. He was influenced by Paul but he goes further. Paul says that all men sin, Augustine that sin is inherited. I won’t try to disambiguate Paul’s message, but it seems like he acknowledges that some can live by the letter of the Law, and thus avoid sin, but that most are weak and need Christ’s help. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 6:50pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/24 "2026-05-15T18:50:54Z")
> [@Fooloso4](#): > > Augustine is usually credited as the originator of the term ‘original sin’. He was influenced by Paul but he goes further. Paul says that all men sin, Augustine that sin is inherited. Augustine’s contribution was the idea that all humans carry Adam’s guilt. Paul said sin entered into the world through one man: Adam. He would have been familiar with that idea since it’s an aspect of Judaism. ---
**Author:** ![Hanover](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/hanover/32/38_2.png) [@Hanover](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Hanover)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 7:16pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/25 "2026-05-15T19:16:09Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > So, we are left with God as the only Person responsible for the sin The philosophical question (beyond the distinctions between the theologies of the various religions) is how can we have free will with an all powerful, all knowing God? That is, if God created me and knows what I’m going to do, such that he could have it all written down right now, how can I say I have freedom when I must do as the book dictates? That’s the abstracted question. When you get into “original sin” you open up an entire theological system, which is one that requires salvation from that sin, some method of achieving it, a son of God given for that purpose, etc. That is, untying “original sin” from the underlying story line in which it is used can go in all different directions, which is why the Jewish and Christian traditions treat the story so differently. ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 7:20pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/26 "2026-05-15T19:20:03Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > He would have been familiar with that idea since it’s an aspect of Judaism. Paul tied sin to the body. There may have been some sects that made this connection between sex and sin, but God said to Adam and Eve, “be fruitful and multiply” (1.28) ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 7:26pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/27 "2026-05-15T19:26:12Z")
> [@Fooloso4](#): > > Paul tied sin to the body. There may have been some sects that made this connection between sex and sin, but God said to Adam and Eve, “be fruitful and multiply” (1.28) The first sin was disobedience, not sex. ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 7:39pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/28 "2026-05-15T19:39:08Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > Are you saying that there are different Gods? I am saying that monotheism was a gradual development, from polytheism, to the worship of one god out of many (henotheism) to monotheism and the exclusion of other gods in Second Isaiah. > [@MoK](#): > > God is responsible for the sin because He created a sinful situation in which sin could be committed He could have created human beings without the ability to choose, but they would be very different from us. He could have created a world without temptation, but it would be a world very different from our own. ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 7:58pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/29 "2026-05-15T19:58:38Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > The first sin was disobedience, not sex. The first mention of sin occurs at Genesis 4.7. As I interpret the story it is not simply about disobedience but the consequences of eating of the tree of knowledge and becoming like the gods: > And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” What is immediately clear is how ill-prepared and ill-suited man was for becoming god-like. They could not even cloth themselves. (3.21) As the story of Genesis continues it becomes even more evident. ---
**Author:** ![Corvus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/corvus/32/1331_2.png) [@Corvus](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Corvus)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 9:31pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/30 "2026-05-15T21:31:54Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > A person can refer to different entities, such as humans, God, etc. Yes true. But it would be silly to call God as person due to possible confusion. > [@MoK](#): > > Well, God is all-powerful, so He can create a reality in which one cannot sin. God created the earth first. Maybe he didn’t know he was going to create humans too? But when he did, it was too late to change for him to a different reality one cannot sin, from the one he already created, which one can sin? ---
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 9:52pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/31 "2026-05-15T21:52:10Z")
> [@Fooloso4](#): > > He could have created human beings without the ability to choose, but they would be very different from us. He could have created a world without temptation, but it would be a world very different from our own. I am not talking about creating a human who cannot freely choose. I am talking about the sinful situation that God created. Why persist in keeping the tree of knowledge, knowing that it is possible that humans eventually sin and eat from it? ---
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 9:54pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/32 "2026-05-15T21:54:40Z")
> [@Corvus](#): > > God created the earth first. Maybe he didn’t know he was going to create humans too? I am talking about the story that happened in Paradise. ---
**Author:** ![Corvus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/corvus/32/1331_2.png) [@Corvus](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Corvus)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 9:59pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/33 "2026-05-15T21:59:24Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > I am talking about the story that happened in Paradise. Of course. I was just reminding you how it all began, and got to the point where the original sin had taken place. It was all chain events of cause and effect. ---
**Author:** ![MoK](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/mok/32/578_2.png) [@MoK](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/MoK)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 10:00pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/34 "2026-05-15T22:00:53Z")
> [@Hanover](#): > > The philosophical question (beyond the distinctions between the theologies of the various religions) is how can we have free will with an all powerful, all knowing God? That is, if God created me and knows what I’m going to do, such that he could have it all written down right now, how can I say I have freedom when I must do as the book dictates? There is no tension between Foreknowledge and free will. There is, however, a problem when a free agent has access to Foreknowledge since the free agent can do the opposite of Foreknowledge. ---
**Author:** ![Count\_Timothy\_von\_Icarus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/count_timothy_von_icarus/32/675_2.png) [@Count\_Timothy\_von\_Icarus](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Count_Timothy_von_Icarus)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 10:02pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/35 "2026-05-15T22:02:16Z")
Well, it’s interesting that “becoming like unto God” (also the goal of Pagan philosophy following Plato in the _Theaetetus_, 176 or thereabouts) is what is ultimately promised to glorified humanity by the grand arc of the narrative through the New Testement: E.g., II Peter 1:4 - “through which to us the most great and precious promises have been given, that through these ye may become partakers of a divine nature, having escaped from the corruption in the world in desires.” So, it is primarily the _means_ that is defective here, not the end. As Saint Maximos puts it in the _Centuries on Love_: > Nothing created by God is evil. It is not food that is evil but gluttony, not the begetting of children but unchastity, not material things but avarice, not glory but vainglory. It is only the misuse of things that is evil, not the things themselves. Anyhow @MoK, the classical interpretation is the God is “responsible” as first cause for all creation, but allows creatures real freedom through effective secondary causality. Hence, in terms of who _sinned_, the answer is Adam, Eve, and Satan, although most theologians don’t spend as much time on the exact nature of Satan’s sin since it is taken for granted. So, as Aquinas describes it: > The woman craved both the promised exaltation and the perfection of knowledge. Added to this were the beauty and sweetness of the fruit, which attracted her to eat of it. And so, scorning the fear of death, she violated God’s command, and ate of the forbidden tree. > Upon analysis, her sin is found to have many aspects. First, there was a sin of pride, whereby she inordinately desired her own excellence. Her second sin was one of curiosity, whereby she coveted knowledge beyond the limits fixed for her. The third sin was that of gluttony, whereby the sweetness of the fruit enticed her to eat. A fourth sin was infidelity, growing out of a false estimate of God, so that she believed the words of the devil who gave the lie to God. Fifthly, there was a sin of disobedience, consisting in a transgression of God’s command. Historically, I find this interesting because “disobedience” would later come to dominate as the lone/ultimate sin in legal framings of sin, whereas even this late it is what Thomas decides to mention last. And for Adam: > The sin came to the man through the woman’s blandishments. He, however, as the Apostle says in 1 Timothy 2:14, “ was not seduced,” as the woman was. That is, he did not believe the words the devil spoke against God. The thought could not cross his mind that God would utter a lying threat or that He would forbid the use of a thing for no good purpose. Yet he was drawn by the devil’s promise to an undue desire of excellence and knowledge. As a result, his will fell away from the right pursuit of justice and, consenting to his wife’s importunities, he followed her in transgressing the divine command, and ate of the fruit of the forbidden tree. [Thomas Aquinas: Compendium theologiae: English](https://isidore.co/aquinas/english/Compendium.htm#187) But this original (first) sin is then the cause of “Original Sin,” which is an ontological wounding of human nature. It is, in Adam’s descendants, only a sin analogically, not actually and culpably (on the Catholic account anyhow). ---
**Author:** ![Corvus](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/corvus/32/1331_2.png) [@Corvus](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Corvus)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 10:05pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/36 "2026-05-15T22:05:58Z")
But the point here is, if God was not human, then it is unreasonable to blame God for original sin or whatever. Because you don’t blame nonhuman for some bad luck or accidents or loss. For example, if your window was broken by a stone thrown by the local yob, you don’t blame the stone. You blame the yob. From my recollection of reading the OT, God was not human. God was spirit. Spirit cannot be blamed for plotting original sin. It is unreasonable to say the spirit was responsible for original sin. Do you agree? ---
**Author:** ![Fooloso4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/aeb1de/32.png) [@Fooloso4](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Fooloso4)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 10:26pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/37 "2026-05-15T22:26:01Z")
> [@MoK](#): > > Why persist in keeping the tree of knowledge, knowing that it is possible that humans eventually sin and eat from it? Eating of the tree of knowledge and sin are two different things. ---
**Author:** ![Pat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8491ac/32.png) [@Pat](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Pat)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 10:36pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/38 "2026-05-15T22:36:11Z")
Disobedience appears to come last for Aquinas because he’s considering the elements in order; Eve has already sinned in half a dozen ways before performing the disobedient action of plucking and eating. The doctrinal understanding of original sin lives on, we might say, in the broad idea of human weakness, our susceptibility to temptation. But we often count it virtue to resist succumbing to temptation, or to resist acting upon a base impulse. But as Aquinas tells it, Eve has already sinned by desiring the fruit, desiring knowledge and excellence, doubting God, all of this, without having acted upon these thoughts and feelings. But Eve was not tainted with original sin, so whence comes her weakness, her susceptibility to temptation? Her pride, her gluttony, and the rest? Is that how God made her? Did the serpent remake her? Isn’t there something odd about Aquinas’s account? ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex007/user_avatar/www.thephilosophyforum.com/frank/32/216_2.png) [@Frank](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 10:55pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/39 "2026-05-15T22:55:07Z")
> [@Pat](#): > > Is that how God made her? She was set up to fail. ---
**Author:** ![Paine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5daacb/32.png) [@Paine](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/u/Paine)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 11:00pm UTC](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003/40 "2026-05-15T23:00:23Z")
Inherited sin may be partially understood by looking at our situation as shaped by our ancestors and what they did. Different languages of theology frame the element in different ways. But it is not like we are wandering around wondering how the idea came about. [Previous page](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003.md?page=1) [Next page](https://www.thephilosophyforum.com/t/who-is-responsible-for-the-original-sin/1003.md?page=3)