Doctrine of Original Sin and Infant Baptism

Fundamental to this discussion are the concepts of the edenic or pre-fall conditions of Adam and Eve and the consequences of the transgression of Adam and Eve. I will review these concepts here. For a more complete discussion of the fall of Adam and Eve, please see Understanding the Eden Experience—The Fall, volume 2, chapter 1 of Ye Shall Know of the Doctrine.

#Four Edenic (Pre-Fall) Characteristics of Adam and Eve

Adam and Eve were both premortal spirit children of our Father in heaven. They are therefore the brother and sister of us all. In the garden their circumstances were unique. Let us examine four conditions that characterized them in that setting:

1. They were immortal and not subject to pain, disease, or death. The word immortal means that Adam and Eve would live indefinitely in their edenic condition. Their bodies were not identical to the bodies of immortal resurrected beings. In speaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, God said, “In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Genesis 2:17), implying that in the interim, until such an eating should occur, Adam and Eve would enjoy a state of immortality. They would not die.

2. They lived in the presence of God the Father. They walked and talked with him. The prophet Joseph Smith spoke of those glorious days when “God conversed with him [Adam] face to face. In his presence, he was permitted to stand, and from his own mouth he was permitted to receive instruction. He heard his [God’s] voice, walked before him, and gazed upon his glory, while intelligence burst upon his understanding” (Lectures on Faith, 13).

3. They were in a state of innocence. We are often tempted to interpret scriptural words or phrases intuitively, based on our secular experience with the word. Sometimes the scriptural meaning of a word or phrase is quite different from its secular meaning. When we say Adam and Eve lived in a state of innocence, what does that mean? Does it mean they were not guilty of sin?

There is a richer meaning implied. Innocence, in Adam and Eve’s situation, means they had an incomplete knowledge of good and evil (see 2 Nephi 2:22-23). This was an obstacle to their individual spiritual development and progression. Without a complete knowledge of good and evil, they could not fully exercise their agency. They could not grow spiritually. They could not progress toward godhood.

Aside from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, there were no challenges, no temptations, and no obstacles in that quasi-heavenly setting. Accordingly, there could be no progression. They were unable to experience a fulness of joy because they knew no sorrow. They were temporarily stuck in a world of spiritual and emotional sterility (see also 2 Nephi 2:12).

4. They could not procreate. Though they were married by divine authority while still in the Garden, they were unable to bear children (2 Nephi 2:23). Thus, they could experience no “joy and rejoicing” in a posterity. They were unable to obey the command to multiply and replenish the earth which was the foremost design and object of their married life. A continuation of this edenic condition would literally defeat the plan of salvation for all those in the premortal state awaiting a mortal experience.

In spite of their innocence, it does seem they were aware of the reason they had been placed on earth. They knew they were to become parents of all mankind—to populate the earth with the family of man—but they were temporarily bereft of a way to accomplish that.

#Dual Nature of the Fall

Fundamental to a full appreciation of the “fall of man” is an understanding of its two-fold nature. There are two aspects of the fall, each quite distinct.

The fall of Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve transgressed, and their transgression resulted in a reversal of all four of the edenic, pre-fall conditions that characterized them in the garden (see above). Consequently:

1. They were no longer immortal. When Adam and Eve partook of the fruit, the seeds of death were planted in their veins. They became subject to physical death, pain, disease, and all the ailments of mortal life.

2. They were cast out from God’s presence. This separation from God is called spiritual death. They did not lose all communication with him. That loss would have thwarted the plan of salvation. Yet, they were cast out from his physical presence. Other forms of communication were left open.

This spiritual death, or separation from God due to Adam’s transgression, is referred to in scripture as the “first death” (2 Nephi 9:15; Alma 11:45; Helaman 14:16).

3. Adam and Eve were blessed to “[become] as Gods, [fully] knowing good from evil” (Alma 12:31).

4. Adam and Eve’s mortal bodies could now procreate and fulfill the divine command to multiply and replenish the earth (2 Nephi 2:25; Moses 6:48; Moses 5:11). As offspring of the mortal Adam and Eve, we have inherited all four of these mortal characteristics. Two are spiritually beneficial, and two are not. Knowledge of good and evil and the ability to procreate are two spiritually productive characteristics. Physical and spiritual death are two adverse consequences of the fall. We will learn, however, that these latter two are necessary and only temporary. Man is not subjected to them in any kind of punitive spirit. They are due to Adam’s transgression. The second Article of Faith reads, “We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.” We may be temporarily inconvenienced because of Adam’s transgression, but we will not be punished permanently. Because of the Savior’s atonement, all men will eventually be resurrected, and no man will suffer a permanent spiritual death because of Adam’s sin.

The fall of you and me. The second aspect of the fall’s dual nature is the fall of you and me as individuals. Each man falls on his own when he commits sin. This is quite a separate phenomenon from the fall of Adam. No one lives without sin (Romans 3:23). Our sin results in our spiritual death. This spiritual death is known as the second death (Helaman 14:18-19; D&C 76:37). The consequence of this spiritual death is different than the spiritual death we experience because of Adam’s transgression. Adam’s transgression brought upon us only a temporary separation from God. The spiritual death wrought by our own sins is permanent, at least until it is overcome. This latter spiritual death, the second death, continues to be permanent if the law of justice cannot be satisfied.

#Accountability

Another LDS concept foundational to this discussion is that of accountability. In LDS doctrine, to be “accountable” means that one must answer to God for one’s conduct. Only those capable of committing sin and of repenting are accountable (D&C 20:71). Children younger than eight and the mentally impaired are not. Satan has no power to tempt little children or other unaccountable individuals (D&C 29:46-50).

Catholics believe all mankind is born in sin and that unless they are “born again”—baptized—before death in mortality, they cannot enter heaven. This applies to all individuals even to newborn infants. Catholics acknowledge no age of accountability before which—should death occur—the infant or child is not accountable for sin. They may use Psalm 51:5 to support their view: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.” They associate this scripture with John 3:3: “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

We declare that “It is solemn mockery before God, that ye should baptize little children” (Moroni 8:9). When David wrote Psalm 51:5 he was experiencing extreme remorse. He had been chastened by Nathan the prophet, who had prophesied the death of his child that was to be born of Bathsheba, with whom David had committed adultery. In this moment of great sorrow and anguish, he spoke bitterly of himself and his sins.

They may also use Romans 5:12, 19: “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned . . . Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.”

Paul also taught, “For where no law is, there is no transgression” (Romans 4:15). Since little children have no law, they have no transgressions. Paul taught that the only “sin” inherited from Adam was physical death, and that Christ paid for that sin so “all would be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:22).

Original Sin

While The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that the transgression of Adam and Eve brought death into the world and made all mortals subject to temptation, suffering, and weakness, it denies that any culpability is automatically transmitted to Adam and Eve’s offspring. All mortals commit sin, but they will be punished “for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression” (A of F 2).

IN OTHER FAITHS. The doctrine of original sin as taught traditionally states that, due to the Fall of Adam, infants are born tainted with actual sin, resulting in the “privation of sanctifying grace”; this dogma “does not attribute to the children of Adam any properly so-called responsibility for the act of their father,” nor is it a voluntary sin “in the strict sense of the word,” yet it is a “real sin” (S. Harent, “Original Sin,” in Catholic Encyclopedia, 1911 ed., vol. 11, 315). All people, according to this doctrine, except the Virgin Mary and Jesus Christ, inherit an actual, existing personal guilt (see -- >Immaculate Conception). A corollary of this belief is the doctrine of infant baptism, holding that infants are to be baptized to remove this sin because those who die without baptism remain unsanctified and forever excluded from heaven and the presence of God.The doctrine of original sin derives from an interpretation given to the writings of Paul, particularly Romans 5:12-21, by some theologians of the second and third centuries. More than any other, Augustine in the fifth century transformed Paul’s teachings on the Fall into the doctrine of original sin. His views were adopted as doctrine and formally canonized by the decrees of the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century. According to this view, Adam’s sin is considered “original” because it arose with the “origin” of man.

Protestantism largely accepts this doctrine. John Calvin stated: “We believe that all the posterity of Adam is in bondage to original sin, which is a hereditary evil” (R. Reed, The Gospel as Taught by Calvin [Grand Rapids, Mich., 1979], p. 33). Protestant views emphasize the inherited nature of the sin, reflecting the German word for “original sin,” Erbsunde (literally “inherited sin”). Rabbinic Judaism teaches of two inclinations, one evil and one good; and some Jews consider “circumcision as a means of escaping damnation” (Samuel Cohon, Essays in Jewish Theology [Cincinnati, Ohio, 1987], p. 265).

IN LDS DOCTRINE. Latter-day Saints believe that infants inherit certain effects of the Fall, but not the responsibility for any sin as a result of Adam’s or Eve’s transgression. From the foundation of the world, the Atonement of Jesus Christ makes amends “for the sins of those who have fallen by the transgression of Adam” (Mosiah 3:11). Therefore, baptism is not needed until children reach a state of accountability, generally at the age of eight years, for little children cannot sin and are innocent (see -- >Children: Salvation of Children). They are redeemed from the beginning by the grace of Jesus Christ (D&C 29:46-47), whose Atonement cleanses them of the effects of the Fall (D&C 137:10). The Prophet Mormon wrote the following words of Christ: “Little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them” (Moro. 8:8).In one account in the Pearl of Great Price, Adam learned that he had been forgiven for his transgression in the Garden of Eden, and that “the Son of God hath atoned for original guilt, wherein the sins of the parents cannot be answered upon the heads of the children” (Moses 6:54). However, as a consequence of the Fall, evil is present in the world and all “children are conceived in sin, [and] so when they begin to grow up, sin conceiveth in their hearts, and they taste the bitter, that they may know to prize the good” (Moses 6:55). Begetting children in marriage is not a sin (cf. Heb. 13:4), but the propensity for sin is inherited.No mortal person bears the burden of repenting for Adam’s transgression. Nevertheless, all inherit the effects of the Fall: All leave the presence of God at birth, all are subject to physical death, and all will sin in some measure. From the moment of conception, the body inherits the seed of mortality that will eventually result in death, but only as a person becomes accountable and chooses evil over good do personal sins result in further separation from God. Thus Adam was counseled: “Wherefore teach it unto your children, that all men, everywhere, must repent, or they can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God, for no unclean thing can dwell there” (Moses 5:57).

Bibliography

Haag, Herbert. Is Original Sin in Scripture? New York, 1969.McConkie, Bruce R. A New Witness for the Articles of Faith, pp. 81-104. Salt Lake City, 1985.BYRON R. MERRILL

Infant Baptism

[This entry has two parts: the -->LDS Perspective concerning this practice, and the -- >Early Christian Origins.]

LDS Perspective

Children are baptized as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints when they reach age eight and receive a bishop’s interview to assess their understanding and commitment. This age for baptism was identified by revelation (D&C 68:25, 28). The Church does not baptize infants.

The practice of baptizing infants emerged among Christians in the third century A.D. and was controversial for some time. According to the Book of Mormon, it similarly became an issue and was denounced among the Nephites in the fourth century A.D. When Mormon, a Nephite prophet, inquired of the Lord concerning baptism of little children, he was told that they are incapable of committing sin and that the curse of Adam is removed from them through the Atonement of Christ. Hence little children need neither repentance nor baptism (Moro. 8:8-22). They are to be taught “to pray and walk uprightly” so that by the age of accountability their baptism will be meaningful and effective for their lives.[See also -->Accountability; -->Children: Salvation of Children; -- >Fall of Adam; -->Original Sin.]BibliographyMcConkie, Bruce R. “The Salvation of Little Children.” Ensign 7 (Apr. 1977):3-7.ROBERT E. PARSONSEarly Christian OriginsAlthough the New Testament never mentions infant baptism either to approve or to condemn the practice, many passages therein associate baptism with faith in Jesus Christ, repentance, and forgiveness of sins, none of which are appropriate requirements for infants (Mark 1:4-5; 16:15-16; Acts 2:37-38; 19:4; 22:16; Romans 6:1-6; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11; Galatians 3:26-27; Colossians 2:12-13; Hebrews 6:1-6; 10:22; 1 Peter 3:21).The assumption that those baptized are committed disciples continues through the second century in Christian literature (Didache 7.1; Shepherd of Hermas: “Vision” 3.7 and “Mandates” 4.3; Epistle of Barnabas 11; Justin, First Apology 1.11, 15). The earliest explicit reference to the practice of baptizing infants dates to shortly after A.D. 200 in the writings of Tertullian, a North African theologian who opposed it on the grounds that baptism carries an awesome responsibility and should be delayed until a person is fully committed to living righteously (De baptismo 18). A decade later Hippolytus, who would become a schismatic bishop in Rome, wrote a handbook of rules for church organization and practice. Some versions of his Apostolic Tradition (21.3-4) refer to baptizing “little ones,” who should have an adult relative speak for them if they are unable to do so themselves. However, since Hippolytus prescribed a normative three-year preparatory period of teaching, reading, fasting, and prayer prior to baptism (Apostolic Tradition 17), the infant baptism passage has been questioned as a later interpolation.

The first Christian writer to defend infant baptism as an apostolic practice was apparently Origen, the preeminent theologian of the Greek-speaking church, who wrote on the subject around A.D. 240 in Alexandria, Egypt. Origen referred to the frequently asked question of why the church should baptize sinless infants (Homily on Luke 14). In response, he argued that baptism takes away the pollution of birth. Origen’s Commentary on Romans further elaborates this theme, asserting that because of hereditary sin, “the church has a tradition from the apostles to give baptism even to infants” (5.9). However, this passage is suspect because it is found only in a Latin translation by Rufinus, who tended on several occasions to “correct” Origen according to later doctrine. A few years later, Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, addressing the question of the timing of infant baptism, wrote that a child’s soul should not be placed in jeopardy of perdition even one day by delaying the grace of baptism (De peccatorum meritis 1.34).

Historically, then, infant baptism cannot be demonstrated as beginning before the third century, when it emerged as a topic of extended controversy. Not until Augustine wrote against the Donatists two centuries later was infant baptism established as a universal custom (Jeremias, pp. 94-97; Jewett, p. 16). Thereafter, the practice went largely unquestioned until the Protestant Reformation, when a radical group in Zurich broke with the reformer Zwingli over this and other issues in 1525. These so-called Anabaptists (those who denied the validity of their baptism as infants and were rebaptized as adults) were precursors of the Baptist movement.

Bibliography

Beasley-Murray, G. R. Baptism in the New Testament. London, 1962.Cullmann, Oscar. Baptism in the New Testament, trans. J. Reid. Chicago, 1950.Jeremias, Joachim. Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries, translated by D. Cairns. Philadelphia, Pa., 1962.Jewett, Paul K. Infant Baptism and the Covenant of Grace. Grand Rapids, Mich., 1978.

KEITH E. NORMAN