The Original Sin, Overcoming Evil

 Submitted by Charles Knighton

Photo credit:

“The cross is, among other things, the ultimate moral ethic. It is about a relationship with the author of the moral law which none of us can keep…”

Adrian Sobers “By what standard?” editorial letter Barbados Advocate of Nov. 26

Mr. Adrian Sobers frequently takes it upon himself to regale us with the sublime nature of Christian moral philosophy while at the same time seeking to undermine competing moral philosophies. Though less so now than when I was younger, I find myself bemused when a seemingly keen intellect is unable to grasp the inherent evil undermining his own philosophy. Might we all take a step back, take a deep breath, open our minds, and examine what core precept forms the basis of this sublime philosophy through which we “fully understand what it means to be human” and where the “universal cry for justice and mercy are perfectly satisfied’?

Christian moral philosophy begins by damning man as evil, then demands that he practice a good which it defines as impossible for him to practice. It demands, as his first proof of virtue, that he accept his own depravity without proof. It demands that he start, not with a standard of value, but with a standard of evil, which is himself, by means of which he is then to define the good: the good is that which he is not. The good is not for him to understand, his duty is to crawl through years of penance, atoning for the guilt of his existence to a mystic God with some incomprehensible design. His only concept of a value is zero: the good is that which is non-man.

The name of this monstrous absurdity is Original Sin.

A sin without volition is an affront to morality and an insolent contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; an automaton is amoral. To hold, as man’s sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of morality. To hold man’s nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of Christian moral philosophy.

And please do not attempt to hide behind the cowardly evasion that man is born with free will, but with a “tendency” to evil. A free will saddled with a tendency is like a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his will is not free.

And what is the nature of the guilt that Christian moral philosophy call his Original Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of knowledge—he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge of good and evil—he became a moral being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by his labor—he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience desire—he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which he is damned  are reason, morality, creativeness, joy—all the cardinal values of our existence. It is not his vices that the Christian myth of man’s fall is designed to explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was—that robot in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love—he was not a man.

Mr. Sobers and his fellow travelers call this a morality of mercy and a doctrine of love for man. What I call it is of little importance. What is important is for people to take what they are taught and actually THINK ABOUT IT!

0 thoughts on “The Original Sin, Overcoming Evil

  1. There was a time when many would be encouraged to discuss philosophy, morals, values and how they interact to form character. Sadly BU reflects the society we have quickly transformed to, it is only the superficial that titillates the cognitive senses.

  2. times have changed people are tired kicking against the pricks. as bush tea has concluded just waiting for BBE and the space ship to land.

  3. @ ac
    … who in their right mind would go to the trouble of reading pass the second line of this…..?
    ….reads like an (unsuccessful) attempt to sound intelligent….

    What the hell happened to simple words in English or Bajan…?

  4. Why not David?
    ….anyone who do not want to be knocked should keep quiet……or go into hiding like Onions.
    Why do you think the only response to a submission should be complimentary? Writers should be encouraged/ urged / hounded into using simple terms….
    Who he think he is now? Zoe? Dictionary? 🙂

  5. Sorry Bushieit appears that this is clearly way above your head. You are so biased that you can’t even see an intelligent post if it in front of you. Why don’t you attempt to write an intelligent blog? It is no use throwing stones when you live in a glass house.

  6. @ David
    “What is wrong with readers being asked to stretch their minds…”
    …..the likelihood of causing possible serious damage to ac, Islandgal and Onions….!
    What happens when small things get stretched? 🙂

    Don’t you see something fundamentally WRONG with Ninjaman giving a lecture to BU in response to Onions position on the impact of intergalactic gamma ray absorption on midAtlantic Ocean temperatures?
    …this is about the same thing going on here.

    LOL @ Islandgal
    Bushie can afford to throw stones – he lives in a bush house…. LOL

    Obviously Bushie done dissect the epistemological demerits of the post and made the necessary note of the fundamental weakness in fact and logic. The Bushman however will not be lured into making Zoe-like theoretical responses in any attempt to appear intellectual on this blog… Fuh wuh nuh?

    …..Bushie was just explaining why wunna did no see any lotta responses…..and then malicious ac had to go and call BT name….

    …besides, this is the beginning of a long weekend, Bushie is more interested in Miller’s take on the sudden and unexplained volumes of dirt being piled up on the doorsteps of his friend Kerrie… 🙂
    …leave the deep stuff for Sunday…

  7. “What happens when small things get stretched? ”

    You speaking from experience Bushie? Are you talking from your back door?

  8. “It is not his vices that the Christian myth of man’s fall is designed to explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was—that robot in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love—he was not a man.”

    “Whatever he WAS- that ROBOT in the Garden of Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love – he was not a man.” Emphasis added.

    The above quote, IS essentially in diametric, antithetical, opposition, to the REAL man, Adam, even after his fall.

    The reason there has always been a NEED for GOOD* Philosophy, is because there IS* BAD philosophy!

    If I did not know good philosophy, I would tend to be impressed with this attempt by Mr. Knighton, to utterly twist and convolute the truth of this subject matter.

  9. BU on moral philosophy

    Bush Tea on sensible words

    Zoe on good philosophy


    But sure, the post is better than most even if the central premise is actually rather antiquated. Jan Jan strikes the right note.

  10. be weary of the devil his name is jack the bear we all must walk carefully he is lurking everywhere

    there is one strong angel his name his name is rafael he knows every secret in heaven and in hell

    all you sons of adam daughters made like eve we can move these mountains if only we believe if only we believe love

Leave a comment, join the discussion.