Mr. Bultitude
Puritan Board Freshman
It's common, when speaking to Eastern Orthodox adherents, to hear them criticize original sin in favor of their own doctrine "ancestral sin." But here's a counterpoint from another Eastern Orthodox fellow: Ancestral vs. Original Sin: A False Dichotomy. A couple key quotes (but I encourage you to read the whole thing!):
When interacting with the various western confessions, particularly our own, is he accurate?
The sharp distinction between Original and Ancestral is not a historical distinctive of Orthodox teaching. ... The reality is that the Western confessions, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant, say nothing about inheriting the personal guilt of Adam’s personal act of sin, but rather concentrate on the effects of that sin, which are transmitted to the entire race of man, which forms an ontological unity with Adam – something we Orthodox also teach. The one document that discusses imputation of guilt, the Westminster Confession, does so in the context of the ontological corruption of mankind, not simply as an unconnected act of transgression by the federal head of the race. In other words, the basis of imputation is not an unjust transfer of guilt-by-association, but a reality rooted in the effect of one man’s sin on the whole race. At the same time, it should be pointed out that the language of the Orthodox in this regard has, historically, been much the same.
When interacting with the various western confessions, particularly our own, is he accurate?