Original Sin?

Joseph Campbell was raised a Catholic,
went to Catholic schools, even graduated
from a Catholic prep school, Canterbury.
He studied and taught the origins and
meaning of myths all his life. This
is his take on original sin, I can't find
a better one.


"Our story of the Fall in the Garden sees nature as corrupt; and that myth corrupts the whole world for us. Because nature is thought of as corrupt, every spontaneous act is sinful and must not be yielded to. You get a totally different civilization and a totally different way of living according to whether your myth presents nature as fallen or whether nature is in itself a manifestation of divinity, and the spirit is the revelation of the divinity that is inherent in nature."

Campbell didn't believe in god. He was referring
to religions such as those of the American Indians,
where the spirit of the divine was revealed in nature.
This is why Indians had no concept of sin, they had
to be taught they were 'corrupt'. How sad..

I know you might think who am I to say Joseph Campbell a great scholar is dead wrong, but about Original Sin he plainly is. It is not his fault, it is probably his so called Catholic education.

First thing to remember is you can't have Original Sin without first recognizing our Original Awesomeness or perfection. Our nature is good and holy, we are made in the image and likeness of God and nothing, including sin, can change that. However original sin explains the wounded-ness or our weakness. As I've mentioned before there is no other explanation as to why we find it often so difficult to do what we know is right or to avoid doing what we know is wrong.

Second thing Campbell gets wrong is really just a jump of faulty logic. I don't understand where he gets that every spontaneous act is sinful. That doesn't follow from his faulty premises and it is not true. There are many spontaneous acts of love, courage, and sacrifice that virtuous.

Finally, he continues to hark on our nature as fallen as if there is no hope. Our nature, obviously wounded as it is, can still manifest divinity. In fact God's love for us is shown to be more awesome in that He loves, forgives, and cares for us in our weakened state then if we were some type of powerful angels.


I am much more comfortable correcting you Bob because you, no offense, do not have the intellectual chops of Joseph Campbell. You continue to bring out this tired argument that Native Americans had no concept of sin. Even Campbell would admit that every culture or religion that has ever existed had a concept or myth concerning sin. While no one is completely corrupt, everyone feels and knows that they are far from perfect. Yet we continue to strive to be as good as we can for God (if we believe in God and believe that He cares about what we do), for ourselves, our families, and our communities. When we make a mistake we need to reconcile with God (if we believe) or with yourself and others. When the American Indians were taught about original sin it wasn't about how corrupt they are, it was about how they were made for more. They were wonderful and Jesus Christ offers a way to unleash that potential of the goodness that dwells in them.

Quote: FrGamble

but about Original Sin he plainly is. It is not his fault, it is probably his so called Catholic education.

He got an old fashioned Catholic education,
in the teens and 1920's. When they spoke
it was the TRUTH, and not the namby pamby
way they talk now. Sin was sin, an offense
against god, not a 'regret' you feel bad about.

He's simply saying that believing the world is
'broken', or corrupt, is it prevents you from seeing
it the way it really is. You start out with a faulty
premise and it colors everything you think about
how the world works.

Quote: Evenbob

He's simply saying that believing the world is
'broken', or corrupt, is it prevents you from seeing
it the way it really is. You start out with a faulty
premise and it colors everything you think about
how the world works.

Is the fact that the world is not perfect, even in our own individual conceptions of what perfect is, not true? Do we want the world to be a better place? If you don't want the world to be a better place than you have rejected original sin, however if you look at the world and say, "we can do so much better" then you have an understanding of what I mean by original sin.

Quote: FrGamble

Do we want the world to be a better place? .

I'm wondering, better than what. I'm
now thinking the world and everything
in it is in a state of perfection at all times.
It's impossible not to be.

Hmmm.. Interesting.

Quote: FrGamble

if you look at the world and say, "we can do so much better" then you have an understanding of what I mean by original sin.

This is another paradox dilemma. You think
you see a creation, so you invent a creator.
You think you see a broken corrupt world,
so you invent what broke and corrupted it.

Do you see what you're doing here? You
create the problem in your mind, where
none exists. It's what people do. Here's
an extreme example. Your crops are devastated
by a weevil. In nature this is common, weevils
like to eat too. But you take it personally,
somebody is out to get you. So you blame
the devil, and you blame his minions, witches.
You hunt them down and burn them at the
stake for causing your problems.

Of course they had nothing to do with it, you
reacted to a story you made up in your head.
The same as thinking the world is broken
and needs to be fixed.

The problem with your analogy is that the weevils really did destroy your crops. Sure you could be ignorant and blame the angels, demons, God, your neighbor, or a witch. However, you could also do something very smart like look into the real reason behind why the weevils did that and see if you can do something different to avoid it or fix the problem. More foolish than blaming witches would be to pretend the weevils aren't real or aren't a problem.

Creation is real. I don't think I see creation I see matter all around me and so do you. The simple question as to where did this come from leads us straight back to a creator. There is really no other rational explanation. If you say that matter is eternal and very came into being then you have to answer how it is here now? You will always run into the problem of an infinite regress unless you logically accept that there must be a non-contingent being or force that created all things. If you have another answer I am all ears. The fact that there is something rather than nothing necessitates a creator. I don't think I see a creation I know I do and therefore there must be a creator. If you think about it a bit you will come to the same conclusion.

Likewise I do not think I see a broken corrupt world, I know it. Again you do to if you honestly look at it. Sure there is more good than bad and our fundamental nature as human beings is good, but there is so much bad. You have to agree with this or you are not being truthful. So naturally the question is how did it get this way? If human beings are fundamentally good then there must be something wrong with us, a weakness or temptation that pulls us in a direction of selfishness and evil that we do not want to go. Again, a honest examination of yourself should be all the proof you need. This is sin and if you have a better reason for why the world is the way it is I am open to hearing it. So far you have offered nothing.

Quote: FrGamble

However, you could also do something very smart like look into the real reason behind why the weevils did that and see if you can do something different to avoid it

You think that's what they did in 1500
was take the scientific, proactive approach,
and exhaust it, then go after witches?
In 1500, going after witches was the proactive
approach.

Quote:

The simple question as to where did this come from leads us straight back to a creator. There is really no other rational explanation.

There are explanations, creator is at the bottom
of the list when the others have been exhausted.
To automatically put it all on a creator means
you have an agenda, to hell with science.

Quote:

Likewise I do not think I see a broken corrupt world, I know it. .

You know it because you've been told it's
corrupt. Corruption is an opinion, it's not
a physical state of being. I can find ten people
who will say it's not corrupt, it means nothing.
The world simply is, it exists. It may seem corrupt
to you, or not corrupt to someone else, either
opinion has no effect on reality.

Reality lies outside our opinions and beliefs.
When you pre-load how you see the world
with all your opinions and beliefs, you're
creating your own reality and ignoring the
world as it really is. Religions are especially
good at doing this on a mass scale. Look at
the Mormons. They have some really whacko
beliefs, and they aren't kidding, they really
believe them. Creating a reality that doesn't
exist outside of their limited way of thinking.

Quote: Evenbob

There are explanations, creator is at the bottom
of the list when the others have been exhausted.
To automatically put it all on a creator means
you have an agenda, to hell with science.

The only ones who say to hell with science are those who propose things like multi-verses or other crazy ideas in a desperate attempt to avoid the unmistakable conclusion that our universe had a beginning. Can you point to any scientific evidence that does not point in the direction of a creator for our universe?