When speaking of the doctrine of Original Sin, theologians are not so much referring to the first sin of Adam which was carried out in the garden of Eden, but the disastrous effects of that sin in all of his progeny. Since the time of Adam, everyone is born into this world as a sinner. As David writes in Psalm 51, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.” (v. 5)

In Romans chapter 5, the Apostle Paul makes the following observations:

“Through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin” (v. 12).
“By the one man’s offense many died” (v. 15).
“Through one man’s offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation” (v. 18).
“By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners” (v. 19).

Dr. J.I. Packer in his book Concise Theology writes:

Scripture diagnoses sin as a universal deformity of human nature, found at every point in every person (1 Kings 8:46; Rom. 3:9-23; 7:18; 1 John 1:8-10). Both Testaments have names for it that display its ethical character as rebellion against God’s rule, missing the mark God set us to aim at, transgressing God’s law, disobeying God’s directives, offending God’s purity by defiling oneself, and incurring guilt before God the Judge. This moral deformity is dynamic: sin stands revealed as an energy of irrational, negative, and rebellious reaction to God’s call and command, a spirit of fighting God in order to play God. The root of sin is pride and enmity against God, the spirit seen in Adam’s first transgression; and sinful acts always have behind them thoughts, motives, and desires that one way or another express the willful opposition of the fallen heart to God’s claims on our lives.

Sin may be comprehensively defined as lack of conformity to the law of God in act, habit, attitude, outlook, disposition, motivation, and mode of existence…

Original sin, meaning sin derived from our origin, is not a biblical phrase (Augustine coined it), but it is one that brings into fruitful focus the reality of sin in our spiritual system. The assertion of original sin means not that sin belongs to human nature as God made it (God made mankind upright, Eccles. 7:29), nor that sin is involved in the processes of reproduction and birth (the uncleanness connected with menstruation, semen, and childbirth in Leviticus 12 and 15 was typical and ceremonial only, not moral and real), but that (a) sinfulness marks everyone from birth, and is there in the form of a motivationally twisted heart, prior to any actual sins; (b) this inner sinfulness is the root and source of all actual sins; (c) it derives to us in a real though mysterious way from Adam, our first representative before God. The assertion of original sin makes the point that we are not sinners because we sin, but rather we sin because we are sinners, born with a nature enslaved to sin.

The phrase total depravity is commonly used to make explicit the implications of original sin. It signifies a corruption of our moral and spiritual nature that is total not in degree (for no one is as bad as he or she might be) but in extent. It declares that no part of us is untouched by sin, and therefore no action of ours is as good as it should be, and consequently nothing in us or about us ever appears meritorious in God’s eyes. We cannot earn God’s favor, no matter what we do; unless grace saves us, we are lost…

Dr. R. C. Sproul has commented, “There is no way to avoid the obvious teaching of Scripture that Adam’s sin had dreadful consequences for his descendents. It is precisely because of the abundance of such biblical statements that virtually every Christian body has composed some doctrine of original sin linked to the fall of Adam.”

Concerning this doctrine, a brief post at the Ligonier website reads:

Original sin has to do with the fallenness of human nature. Jonathan Edwards wrote a tremendous treatise on original sin. He not only devoted himself to a lengthy exposition of what the Bible teaches about man’s fallen character and his propensity toward wickedness, but he made a study from a secular, rational perspective that addressed the philosophy that was widespread in his day: Everyone in the world is born innocent, in a state of moral neutrality in which they don’t have any predilection toward either the good or the evil. It’s society that corrupts these innocent natives, so to speak. As we are exposed to sinful behavior around us, our normal, natural innocence is eroded by the influence of society. But that begs the question, How did society get corrupt in the first place? Society is people. Why is it that so many people have sinned? It’s almost axiomatic in our culture that nobody is perfect. And Edwards asked questions like, Why not? If everyone were born in a state of moral neutrality, you would expect statistically that approximately 50 percent of those people would grow up and never sin. But that’s not what we find. Everywhere we find human beings acting against the moral precepts and standards of the New Testament. In fact, whatever the moral standards are of the culture in which they live, nobody keeps them perfectly. Even the honor that’s established among thieves is violated by thieves. No matter how low the level of morality is in a given society, people break it.

So there is something indubitable about the fallenness of our human character. All people sin.

The doctrine of original sin teaches that people sin because we are sinners. It’s not that we are sinners because we sin, but rather, we sin because we are sinners; that is, since the fall of man, we have inherited a corrupted condition of sinfulness. We now have a sin nature. The New Testament says we are under sin; we have a disposition toward wickedness, so that we all do, in fact, commit sins because it is our nature to commit sins. But that’s not the nature that was originally given to us by God. We were originally innocent, but now the race has been plummeted into a state of corruption.

Elsewhere on the same site, we read this question and answer:

How is it just that all humanity is born into sin because of Adam’s fall?

…The New Testament does teach that the whole world is born into the consequences of a fallen nature because of the sin of Adam and Eve. The New Testament repeats this idea frequently—“that through the disobedience of one man, death comes into the world.” This has been an occasion for much theological protest. What kind of a God would punish all people with the consequences of one individual’s sin? In fact, it seems to go contrary to the teaching of the prophet Ezekiel. He rebuked the people of Israel when they said that the fathers had eaten sour grapes and the children’s teeth were set on edge. The prophet said that God treats every person according to his own sin. He doesn’t punish me for what my father did, nor does he punish my son for what I did, although the consequences may spill out into three or four generations. That the guilt is not transferred from one person to another seems to be the message in Ezekiel.

It makes the question all the more puzzling. In protest we want to say, “No damnation without representation.” We don’t like to be held accountable for what somebody else did, although there are occasions in our own system of justice where we recognize a certain level of culpability for what another person does through the means of criminal conspiracy.

For example, I might hire you to kill somebody. Even though I’m far away from the scene of the crime and don’t pull the trigger, I can still be tried for first-degree murder. All you did was carry out my desire. Even though I didn’t pull the trigger, I’m guilty of the intent and malice of forethought that you actually exercised.

You might say that’s a poor analogy of the Fall because nobody hired Adam to sin against God in my name. Obviously we didn’t. He was appointed to be the representative of the whole human race. Again, we tend to find that difficult to swallow because I don’t like to be held accountable for what my representative does if I don’t have the opportunity to choose my representative. I certainly didn’t choose Adam to represent me. That’s one of the reasons we like to have the right to elect our representatives in government: The actions that they take in the political realm have tremendous consequences on our lives. We can’t all be in Washington enacting legislation. We want to elect our representatives in the hope that they will accurately represent our desires and our wishes.

There is no time in human history when you were more perfectly represented than in the Garden of Eden because your representative was chosen infallibly by a perfectly holy, perfectly just, omniscient God. So I cannot say that I would have done differently than Adam did.

One last point: If we object in principle to God’s allowing one person to act for another, that would be the end of the Christian faith. Our whole redemption rests on the same principle, that through the actions of Christ we are redeemed.

This being the case then, how do we deal with the Ezekiel 18:20 which says, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”

Turretinfan addresses this exact issue as follows:

Introduction

It seems that the most frequently cited passage against original sin is probably Ezekiel 18:20. Taken out of context, this verse might seem quite helpful to the position against Original Sin. Once we read it in context, though, such a view of the verse collapses, for the verse is part of a larger rhetorical message, namely, if you repent, you will be saved – regardless of the sins of your parents or children. We’ll see that now, as we turn to the text.

Summary

The chapter is a response to the Jewish (extra-Scriptural) proverb, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge.” The proverb is a challenge to God’s fairness. In essence, the proverb is the complaining proverb a people suffering for their sins, but seeking to place the blame elsewhere. God responds to this proverb by telling the people that they should not make excuses: if they will repent, they will be saved.

Detailed Exegesis

By the “sour grapes” proverb, the people are, in essence, saying that they have done everything right, but God is still punishing them, because their fathers were wicked. We can see that this is not something unique to the Jews of Ezekiel’s day:

Matthew 23:29-32

29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous, 30 And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. 31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. 32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.

You see the Pharisees, like their physical and spiritual ancestors were outwardly religious. They condemned their fathers – but they were not really any better. They did not have the prophets, but they let the greatest prophet of all, John the Baptist, be beheaded. They did not have Isaiah, but they had him of whom Isaiah prophesied, and they slew him.

In fact, they were not right with God. They may have blamed their fathers for the Roman occupation, but they did not deserve better, and they and their children were punished for their sin by the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.

The gist of the proverbs seems to be a comparison to a situation in which a child is born deformed, on account of the father eating bad grapes before conceiving the child. Thus, the child is punished with bad teeth because of the father’s bad judgment, or perhaps even his simple mistake.

The underlying theme is that this is unfair. Why should a child be punished for something someone else did? The human mind, full of autonomy (in Ezekiel’s day, in Jesus’ day, and in our day), doesn’t like the idea of responsibility that is outside an individual’s control.

God answers to Israel saying that will “not have occasion any more to use this proverb.”

He begins by relying on his sovereignty: “All souls are mine,” God says, “equally the soul of the father and of the child.” God does not stop there but continues, “the soul that sins shall die.”

This is God’s rhetorical comprise to the complainers. He tells them up front that he can do what he wants with the souls of men – with their lives. The are all his. He has decreed that those who sin will die. This is his right as Creator.

In verses 5-9, God describes a hypothetical righteous man. This righteous man obeys God’s law down to even the ceremonial details of not sleeping with his wife during her period. He does everything right, and God says that such a man will live.

Then, in verses 10-13, God describes a hypothetical son of the righteous man. This son does not follow in his father’s footsteps. Instead, this son is a robber, a murderer, and an adulterer. He does do everything right – in fact he does everything wrong, and God says that such a man will surely die.

Finally, in verses 14-17, God describes a hypothetical son of the wicked man. This son does not follow in his father’s footsteps. Instead, he repents of his father’s sins (“seeth all his father’s sins which he hath done, and considereth, and doeth not such like”) and lives righteously. God says that such a son will live, and that God will not punish such a son for the iniquity of the wicked father.

In verse 18, God clarifies that nevertheless the father who was wicked will nevertheless die for his iniquity. In other words, his righteous son will not redeem the father’s wickedness.

But the people are very stubborn. They ask, “Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father?” The think they are very clever, because they remember the law:

Exodus 34:7 Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

But they do not understand God’s point. So, God answers them: “When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.” God’s point is to convict the complaining people of their sin.

God even goes further. He offers the people a morality of pure individualism: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.”

It is as though God says, “Oh, so you want to be considered on your own individual merits: fine, let it be so.” It’s to their condemnation, not their justification.

God explains further that He will even go further and permit repentance: “But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.”

Notice the parallel to the first situation. In the first situation, the person has a wicked father, but he lives righteously, and God lets him live. In the second situation, the person is himself wicked, but he repents, and God lets him live.

You see, if God will turn aside judgment from those who repent, then it does not matter that the father sinned. If a person will repent (see what his father did and do otherwise – or see what he himself has done and do otherwise) he will live.

God completes his thought regarding the acceptability of repentance for life with this comment (which has itself often been misunderstood): “Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?”

What God is saying is that he has not ruled out repentance – that the fact that the wages of sin are death, and that children bear the iniquities of their fathers, these facts do not make God out to be a God who simply wants men to sin and die. No, God has permitted life even for sinners, through repentance.

That this is what God means can be seen not only from the context above, but from God’s own explanation by comparison:

“But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.”

God provides a comparison: if a wicked man repents he will live, and if a righteous man apostatizes, he will die.

But the people still refuse to acknowledge God’s justice. They say, “The way of the Lord is not equal.” This is a serious and indeed blasphemous charge against God. Note that “not equal” is the etymological root of “iniquity.” They are basically charging God with sin.

God responds with justified indignation: “O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?” God convicts the people of Israel of sin. He is righteous, they are sinners.

Again, the people say, “The way of the Lord is not equal.”

And again, God replies: “Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?”

God then repeats essentially the same thing he just said. First, if a righteous man apostacizes, he will die: “When a righteous man turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and dieth in them; for his iniquity that he hath done shall he die.” Second, if a wicked man repents, he will live: “Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die.”

Again, a third time the people say, “The way of the Lord is not equal.”

And again, God replies: “Hear now, O house of Israel; Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?”

So, God gives them one last chance to repent, and he makes clear that this what he is offering, regardless of their fathers’ sins, regardless of their own sins, and yet – in doing so – he reveals the missing link in the chain:

“Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, saith the Lord GOD. Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin. Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.”

Did you notice what is the missing link in their chain? “Make you a new heart and a new spirit.” That’s what they need – something they cannot provide for themselves.

Conclusion

We have seen that the passage is talking about repentance, and how inherited guilt is no bar to repentance. We may still repent and live – and that God has provided the opportunity for repentance. On the other hand, we have also learned that repentance requires a drastic change in a person. A change of heart. As we learn from other parts of Ezekiel (and other parts of the Bible), that’s something God does:

Ezekiel 11:19 And I will give them one heart, and I will put a new spirit within you; and I will take the stony heart out of their flesh, and will give them an heart of flesh:

Ezekiel 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

Thus, we pray with the Psalmist:

Psalm 51:10 Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me.

That is a prayer to be prayed by anyone who finds himself in sin – prayer for a repentant and contrite heart, so that we may turn from our sins and live.

For further reading, I highly recommend the article by Dr. R. C. Sproul entitled “Adam’s Fall and Mine” found here.