What do you think?
Rate this book
Born Bad: Original Sin and the Making of the Western World
"Original sin is the Western world's creation story."According to the Christian doctrine of original sin, humans are born inherently bad, and only through God's grace can they achieve salvation. In this captivating and controversial book, acclaimed historian James Boyce explores how this centuries–old concept has shaped the Western view of human nature right up to the present. Boyce traces a history of original sin from Adam and Eve, St. Augustine, and Martin Luther to Adam Smith, Sigmund Freud, and Richard Dawkins, and explores how each has contributed to shaping our conception of original sin.Boyce argues that despite the marked decline in church attendance in recent years, religious ideas of morality still very much underpin our modern secular society, regardless of our often being unaware of their origins. If today the specific doctrine has all but disappeared (even from churches), what remains is the distinctive discontent of Western people—the feelings of guilt and inadequacy associated not with doing wrong, but with being wrong. In addition to offering an innovative history of Christianity, Boyce offers new insights in to the creation of the West.Born Bad is the sweeping story of a controversial idea and the remarkable influence it still wields.
208 pages, Kindle Edition
First published July 23, 2014
63 people are currently reading
424 people want to read
About the author
James Boyce
6 books34 followersI am an independent writer and historian who lives in Hobart. I have written five major books. My first, Van Diemen’s Land, (2008) was described by Tim Flannery as ‘the first ecologically based social history of colonial Australia’ that was a ‘must read for anyone interested in how land shapes people’. 1835: The Founding of Melbourne and the Conquest of Australia (2011), that reimagined the cultural and legal context for the conquest of the continent, was the Age Book of the year in 2012. Both colonial histories won the Tasmanian Book Prize and won or were short listed in multiple other national book awards. Born Bad: Original Sin and the Making of the Western World (2014), was published in Australia as well as the US and the UK (the Washington Post described it as an ‘brilliant and exhilarating work of popular scholarship’.) More recently, Losing Streak: How Tasmania was Gamed by the Gambling Industry (2016), was long listed in the Walkley Book Award, short listed in the Ashurst Business Literature Prize and won the People Choices Category in the Premiers Literary Prizes, as well as contributing to public debate about gambling policy. In July 2020, my first English history book was released. Imperial Mud: The Fight for the Fens explores the resistance by local people to the drainage and enclosure of the wondrous wetlands of eastern England. It is the story of empire played out in the imperial homeland.
My books are serious history written for a general readership. While I don’t compromise on research, I also don’t assume prior knowledge. My aim is to write books that can be read and enjoyed by anyone with an interest in the subject. I believe that history does belongs to us all, because who we are, how we see the world and what future we imagine, is all shaped by the stories of the past.
My books are serious history written for a general readership. While I don’t compromise on research, I also don’t assume prior knowledge. My aim is to write books that can be read and enjoyed by anyone with an interest in the subject. I believe that history does belongs to us all, because who we are, how we see the world and what future we imagine, is all shaped by the stories of the past.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews
August 18, 2022
This is one of the most thoughtful books on religious history I’ve ever seen. I assumed Boyce would examine all the ways that the doctrine of original sin has blighted human freedom and potential. But his book conducts a pro and con discussion, showing the doctrine’s potential to both level social ranking and to justify dictatorship over sinners. Boyce traces the incarnations of a basic idea through the centuries. He explores how the nagging question of “What’s wrong with me?” has produced particular theological, political, philosophical, psychological, and scientific answers -- from Western Romans in a time of social disintegration, to medieval church leaders claiming monopoly control over access to heaven, to rebels against “God appointed” rulers. He examines how the notion of inborn vice has influenced modern-age thinkers such as Adam Smith, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud, or Richard Dawkins: “Honest history must admit that human beings seem to be capable of all things, and acknowledge that the history of original sin is not concerned with who we are, but who we think, we are.”
December 28, 2023
Original Sin: The view which holds that the sin which caused Adam’s fall and expulsion from paradise is transmitted from generation to generation, so that all descendants of Adam must be regarded as being of a ‘perverted’ or ‘depraved’ nature. -MLK Jr.
To say that original sin comes verbatim from Old Testament scripture is a falsity that is widely promulgated. In fact, the word ‘sin’ is nowhere to be found in the biblical accountings of Adam and Eve. The punishments for disobedience were childbirth pain and patriarchy for Eve [Genesis 3:16] and sweat and toil for Adam [Genesis 3:23]. True, they were both expelled from the garden [Genesis 3:23-24], but there is no mention of any trans-generational retribution. None. Nada. Nope.
“The idea of original sin arose from centuries of discussion and debate on the meaning of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, rather than from any literal reading of scripture. The challenge for early Christians was to explain in what sense Christ was a universal savior: from what, exactly, did everyone need to be saved?” (pg 199)
Part of the answer, James Boyce proposes, was provided by Saint Paul. Paul saw Jesus as something of a “New Adam,” a second chance at righting that horrible, horrible wrong (eating a piece of fruit). But, even though Paul suggested that the crucifixion was to put right the fractured Man/God relationship, “he never wrote that all humans had inherited the sin of Adam and faced the wrath and judgment of God because of this.”
So the question is this, did a decision to disobey God some six thousand years ago really result in a dogmatically sinful inheritance of which you and I (and every other human being on the planet) are carriers? If you find that question perplexing then you are in good company.
Boyce’s accounting of the evolution of Original Sin, from Saint Augustine to Thomas Aquinas to Martin Luther to John Calvin to Thomas Hobbs to John Wesley to Billy Graham, is surprisingly extensive for such a short book. He even dedicates large portions of his analysis to heretical detractors like Charles Darwin (chapter 18), Sigmund Freud (chapter 19), and Richard Dawkins (chapter 21).
This is a book I would recommend to saints and sinners alike. It is occasionally irreverent but remarkably cerebral and genuinely respectful.
To say that original sin comes verbatim from Old Testament scripture is a falsity that is widely promulgated. In fact, the word ‘sin’ is nowhere to be found in the biblical accountings of Adam and Eve. The punishments for disobedience were childbirth pain and patriarchy for Eve [Genesis 3:16] and sweat and toil for Adam [Genesis 3:23]. True, they were both expelled from the garden [Genesis 3:23-24], but there is no mention of any trans-generational retribution. None. Nada. Nope.
“The idea of original sin arose from centuries of discussion and debate on the meaning of the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, rather than from any literal reading of scripture. The challenge for early Christians was to explain in what sense Christ was a universal savior: from what, exactly, did everyone need to be saved?” (pg 199)
Part of the answer, James Boyce proposes, was provided by Saint Paul. Paul saw Jesus as something of a “New Adam,” a second chance at righting that horrible, horrible wrong (eating a piece of fruit). But, even though Paul suggested that the crucifixion was to put right the fractured Man/God relationship, “he never wrote that all humans had inherited the sin of Adam and faced the wrath and judgment of God because of this.”
So the question is this, did a decision to disobey God some six thousand years ago really result in a dogmatically sinful inheritance of which you and I (and every other human being on the planet) are carriers? If you find that question perplexing then you are in good company.
Boyce’s accounting of the evolution of Original Sin, from Saint Augustine to Thomas Aquinas to Martin Luther to John Calvin to Thomas Hobbs to John Wesley to Billy Graham, is surprisingly extensive for such a short book. He even dedicates large portions of his analysis to heretical detractors like Charles Darwin (chapter 18), Sigmund Freud (chapter 19), and Richard Dawkins (chapter 21).
This is a book I would recommend to saints and sinners alike. It is occasionally irreverent but remarkably cerebral and genuinely respectful.
June 28, 2022
My rating of this book is more indicative of my ambivalence towards it…
If one were to rate it according to its avowed intention of being a more or less readable historical presentation of a complex subject (the Augustinian concept of Original Sin) as it has infiltrated and dominated the Western world over the last 1500 years or so, then I would probably rate this as five stars… Boyce is concerned to let us know that this is just what he wants to do; and he does it with great skill and acumen. So for anyone interested in this historical unravelling of this story as it winds its way throughout Western History, this is a highly recommended read. But.
My own personal concerns stem from what I consider “problematic” issues related to this notion.
Boyce necessarily starts with Augustine of Hippo, who after all actually originated the idea (derived from his understanding based on Jerome’s Latin Vulgate mistranslation of a phrase in Paul’s (Greek) Epistle to the Romans) which suggested to Augustine that Mankind is perpetually stained with this Original Sin from Adam and Eve’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden, and this “stain” is actually contained within the semen of all men as a result. This interpretation is uniquely Augustine’s. And concomitant with it is his insistence that we are all predestined either to heaven or to hell, and that there is nothing we can do about it (a view ultimately eschewed by the Roman church, but reinstated by the Calvinistic interpretation and perpetuated in Scottish Presbyterianism after the Protestant Reformation period).
A Celtic contemporary (Pelagius) preferred to base his understanding on the first chapter of Genesis, believing that mankind was inherently good (as God himself declared this to be so in that chapter). Boyce also refers to the fact that Augustine has been a Manichaean for 8-9 years some time before he developed his own concept, but tends to dismiss Mani’s influence on Augustine’s ideas. This to me is questionable, since the Manichaean concept that all matter is inherently evil seems to me to be a particularly pertinent element of Augustine’s understanding, and certainly would help explain Augustine’s exhaustive (and ultimately effective) rantings and ravings against the Pelagians’ view on this matter.
So it seems to me that there is something other than just Augustine’s view that needs to be considered: the concept of “sin” itself, and its “connection” with evil, badness, etc. One needs to read Boyce’s book from within his constraints; and these include an unquestioning Theistic basis; an interpretation of “Christian” salvation which is “justified” by Augustine’s interpretation (itself not specifically scriptural); questions of Predestination and Free Will; the Platonic error of the concept of the Ideals (hence “idealism”; associated with spiritual “perfection” and superior reality, compounded by Gnostic “levels of higher beings”; the Manichaean error of equating the “spiritual” with goodness, and Matter with evil) itself a misinterpretation of the Zoroastrian error of establishing Good and Evil and two distinct and separate entities perpetually at odds with one another…
More disturbingly, however, is the sense one has that, in presenting this “history”, Boyce is presenting an apologia concerning Augustine’s interpretation — and that suggests that, whether Augustine’s ideas are right or wrong, the predominance of his influence on Western History is so strong that Boyce can find instances of it even among the most ardent atheists of the modern world. This view of “history” then seems to argue that, since it had had such a powerful influence, it is in itself part of a history which cannot be changed, and we will need to “deal with it” (as it were). This in turn suggests a kind of laissez faire mindset which bothers me. There results a kind of resignation involved with this view which discourages trying to do anything to change it.
There is very little in this book that deals confrontationally with the consequences linked with Augustine’s interpretation. In particular, little is discussed regarding the physical and (more importantly) psychological damage and scarring that has been inflicted on Western humanity as a result of these Christian misconceptions piled upon misconceptions throughout the centuries. I tend to believe that there is an increasingly strong resurgence against this kind of interpretation in today’s world: no one is “born bad” (children in particular are essentially innocent — but if one actually believes that children are essentially “bad” then perhaps one can begin to understand how “discipline” and “punishment” even of the harshest kind have been erroneously “justified” in the past...). More and more people are beginning to understand that concepts of Good and Evil are relative rather than absolute, and need to be dealt with in other ways, linked with community and social living in specific places; but if Boyce’s intention is purely apologetic (although I am not sure that he is necessarily so) then I would hardly rate this even one star…
As I mentioned earlier, most of my objections rise from concepts which have been deliberately excluded from consideration for the purposes of this history. Certainly, from a historical point of view, Boyce has done a commendable job in negotiating the highs and lows via devious rifts and valleys of this concept in the past. Be that as it may, the book should be useful in placing Augustine’s beliefs in their proper context, so we can realise his basic errors, and move on from them. Hopefully this will then assist us to get on with our lives, and provide us with a finer and nobler basis for establishing a more humane and considerate world both for ourselves and for others.
If one were to rate it according to its avowed intention of being a more or less readable historical presentation of a complex subject (the Augustinian concept of Original Sin) as it has infiltrated and dominated the Western world over the last 1500 years or so, then I would probably rate this as five stars… Boyce is concerned to let us know that this is just what he wants to do; and he does it with great skill and acumen. So for anyone interested in this historical unravelling of this story as it winds its way throughout Western History, this is a highly recommended read. But.
My own personal concerns stem from what I consider “problematic” issues related to this notion.
Boyce necessarily starts with Augustine of Hippo, who after all actually originated the idea (derived from his understanding based on Jerome’s Latin Vulgate mistranslation of a phrase in Paul’s (Greek) Epistle to the Romans) which suggested to Augustine that Mankind is perpetually stained with this Original Sin from Adam and Eve’s disobedience in the Garden of Eden, and this “stain” is actually contained within the semen of all men as a result. This interpretation is uniquely Augustine’s. And concomitant with it is his insistence that we are all predestined either to heaven or to hell, and that there is nothing we can do about it (a view ultimately eschewed by the Roman church, but reinstated by the Calvinistic interpretation and perpetuated in Scottish Presbyterianism after the Protestant Reformation period).
A Celtic contemporary (Pelagius) preferred to base his understanding on the first chapter of Genesis, believing that mankind was inherently good (as God himself declared this to be so in that chapter). Boyce also refers to the fact that Augustine has been a Manichaean for 8-9 years some time before he developed his own concept, but tends to dismiss Mani’s influence on Augustine’s ideas. This to me is questionable, since the Manichaean concept that all matter is inherently evil seems to me to be a particularly pertinent element of Augustine’s understanding, and certainly would help explain Augustine’s exhaustive (and ultimately effective) rantings and ravings against the Pelagians’ view on this matter.
So it seems to me that there is something other than just Augustine’s view that needs to be considered: the concept of “sin” itself, and its “connection” with evil, badness, etc. One needs to read Boyce’s book from within his constraints; and these include an unquestioning Theistic basis; an interpretation of “Christian” salvation which is “justified” by Augustine’s interpretation (itself not specifically scriptural); questions of Predestination and Free Will; the Platonic error of the concept of the Ideals (hence “idealism”; associated with spiritual “perfection” and superior reality, compounded by Gnostic “levels of higher beings”; the Manichaean error of equating the “spiritual” with goodness, and Matter with evil) itself a misinterpretation of the Zoroastrian error of establishing Good and Evil and two distinct and separate entities perpetually at odds with one another…
More disturbingly, however, is the sense one has that, in presenting this “history”, Boyce is presenting an apologia concerning Augustine’s interpretation — and that suggests that, whether Augustine’s ideas are right or wrong, the predominance of his influence on Western History is so strong that Boyce can find instances of it even among the most ardent atheists of the modern world. This view of “history” then seems to argue that, since it had had such a powerful influence, it is in itself part of a history which cannot be changed, and we will need to “deal with it” (as it were). This in turn suggests a kind of laissez faire mindset which bothers me. There results a kind of resignation involved with this view which discourages trying to do anything to change it.
There is very little in this book that deals confrontationally with the consequences linked with Augustine’s interpretation. In particular, little is discussed regarding the physical and (more importantly) psychological damage and scarring that has been inflicted on Western humanity as a result of these Christian misconceptions piled upon misconceptions throughout the centuries. I tend to believe that there is an increasingly strong resurgence against this kind of interpretation in today’s world: no one is “born bad” (children in particular are essentially innocent — but if one actually believes that children are essentially “bad” then perhaps one can begin to understand how “discipline” and “punishment” even of the harshest kind have been erroneously “justified” in the past...). More and more people are beginning to understand that concepts of Good and Evil are relative rather than absolute, and need to be dealt with in other ways, linked with community and social living in specific places; but if Boyce’s intention is purely apologetic (although I am not sure that he is necessarily so) then I would hardly rate this even one star…
As I mentioned earlier, most of my objections rise from concepts which have been deliberately excluded from consideration for the purposes of this history. Certainly, from a historical point of view, Boyce has done a commendable job in negotiating the highs and lows via devious rifts and valleys of this concept in the past. Be that as it may, the book should be useful in placing Augustine’s beliefs in their proper context, so we can realise his basic errors, and move on from them. Hopefully this will then assist us to get on with our lives, and provide us with a finer and nobler basis for establishing a more humane and considerate world both for ourselves and for others.
October 8, 2014
This is a fascinating book. The first half seems a bit like a history lesson but then the second half in the modern world really gets you thinking. Who would think that the idea that we are all flawed would influence such a diverse range as Freud, Adam Smith and Richard Dawkins? I reread the first half after I finished the book to get a better sense of how Augustine and Pelagius and other early thinkers contributed to the 'modern thinkers'.
This book is easy to read and engaging - for anyone interested in society and how it works.
This book is easy to read and engaging - for anyone interested in society and how it works.
May 7, 2025
If you don’t read nonfiction but you want a nonfiction book that’s short and every sentence feels absolutely necessary this is it. You can have my copy, it is too good to not share. I thoroughly enjoyed this one.
May 5, 2025
I’ll write a real review when I’ve had time to process but I love how much he hates Richard Dawkins.
Okay, so I really appreciated this book and I think it’s very natural to want more from it. It was incredibly concise except for when Boyce was reading Dawkins to filth. The argument made was that original sin has affected so much of western history that even our secularists believe and operate under its gaze. We are left wanting for a replacement to this harmful theology, and because Boyce isn’t sure, we also can’t be.
The most powerful thought I had in response, that was born of Boyce’s prose, is that we are drawn to the idea of original sin because goodness is so mundane. When things go well and our neighbors are kind, there’s little to report because things usually go well and people are usually good. And that in itself is miraculous.
Okay, so I really appreciated this book and I think it’s very natural to want more from it. It was incredibly concise except for when Boyce was reading Dawkins to filth. The argument made was that original sin has affected so much of western history that even our secularists believe and operate under its gaze. We are left wanting for a replacement to this harmful theology, and because Boyce isn’t sure, we also can’t be.
The most powerful thought I had in response, that was born of Boyce’s prose, is that we are drawn to the idea of original sin because goodness is so mundane. When things go well and our neighbors are kind, there’s little to report because things usually go well and people are usually good. And that in itself is miraculous.
December 19, 2016
I have lived with the suspicion of the seditious role of the concept of original sin in the evolution of western society, culture and character. My sense having been that it has been responsible for some of the more egregious cruelties through which both people and whole cultures have had to suffer over centuries in the western world, and in the far flung corners of the world where cross and sword sought domination of anyone not so afflicted so that they too could be brought into the fold. This book is an outstanding piece of work, it confirms at depth my own suspicions and explores both the development and the insidious influence of the concept of original sin down through the ages right into the present. It can been seen even now in the application of social policy to the furtherance of Protestant ethic and the impunity ever growing of the ruling class. That class having now shifted from the hereditary ruling families to the corporate lords of Banking and commerce and the self serving ruling elites of the western political classes. I really enjoyed the book, backed by sold scholarship it managed to draw together for me many strings. One of the best books I have read this year. A ripper.
May 27, 2018
As someone who was raised in an environment that strongly upheld the philosophical tenet that all people are 'Born Bad', ie. are sinners in 'god's' eyes because of the original sin of Adam in the garden of Eden, this was a very interesting read. If you ever doubt that ideas are not important or influential, this book is a powerful reminder to the contrary.
The idea of original sin was not inevitable. It was and continues to be a hotly contested notion but from the time of St. Augustine until today it has been the central crux of Christian philosophy and theology. Everything hinges upon human being 'sinners' and in need of salvation.
For those who grew up with this idea it is a terrible notion. So much pain and suffering has resulted as the result of this lie. But be that as it may, Boyce gives a good overview of how the concept grew, the various challenges to it and how it has had a huge impact on 'Western' thinking, even those who claim to be atheists.
I got a bit bogged down in the many references to texts and theologians and their positions (and I usually love that sort of thing) but other than that a real strong overview of an important idea.
The idea of original sin was not inevitable. It was and continues to be a hotly contested notion but from the time of St. Augustine until today it has been the central crux of Christian philosophy and theology. Everything hinges upon human being 'sinners' and in need of salvation.
For those who grew up with this idea it is a terrible notion. So much pain and suffering has resulted as the result of this lie. But be that as it may, Boyce gives a good overview of how the concept grew, the various challenges to it and how it has had a huge impact on 'Western' thinking, even those who claim to be atheists.
I got a bit bogged down in the many references to texts and theologians and their positions (and I usually love that sort of thing) but other than that a real strong overview of an important idea.
July 18, 2015
Well written and admittedly I wouldn't have picked this up if not for James's previous fantastic books. But just never got into the subject matter. Would have been happy with an article rather than a book.
February 3, 2016
A comprehensive and thorough analysis of the origins of the concept behind "original sin". I sometimes found the writing style a little off-putting. Overall a good book that I would recommend to those interested in theology and the history of Christianity.
April 22, 2025
This was an absolutely fascinating take on church history. It is written from a historical rather than theological view point so if you are looking for specific theological arguments about original sin then another book will be needed.
The first part of the book traces the theology of the early church, specifically focusing on how Augustine of Hippo impacted the theology. Part two focuses on how the theology impacted modern western thought picking up with the Enlightenment and following major thoughts of not only theology but philosophy, science through to the modern day.
The first part of the book traces the theology of the early church, specifically focusing on how Augustine of Hippo impacted the theology. Part two focuses on how the theology impacted modern western thought picking up with the Enlightenment and following major thoughts of not only theology but philosophy, science through to the modern day.
February 27, 2016
From the 5th Century (Augustinian times) to the present time, James Boyce argues that the concept of original sin has so dominated western thought and culture that religious converts, secularists, and even atheists have not been able to escape its resulting view of human nature. We’re bad. We need redemption/God’s grace/baptism/psychoanalysis – something - call it what you will.
I’ve never read anything by James Boyce before and know nothing of his standing to write such as book as this one. I discovered he’s a Research Associate in the School of Geography and Environmental Studies at the University of Tasmania no less. Not exactly the credentials or the background you’d expect for the author of a book about original sin. Nevertheless he’s put forth some interesting arguments, lucidly; and, after all, he isn’t writing theology but a history of ideas.
Boyce begins with Augustine of Hippo and shortly thereafter contrasts Augustine’s views with Pelagius. I googled him: “Scottorum pultibus praegravatus,” a source said and translated the phrase to “weighted down by Irish porridge.” Was this a joke? Anyway Augustine won the day; Pelagianism was designated a heresy. It wasn’t okay to deny original sin, predestination, or the need for Christian grace. Boyce takes us through the creation stories of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 and the various Church fathers (and one mother) such as Anselm, Aquinas, Julian of Norwich, to name just a few. They didn’t all agree with Augustine’s views. He explains how infant baptism changed from a blessing on the child to as good a salvific measure as anxious parents could receive since their child was already doomed. The Roman Catholic Church was now micro-managing salvation and indulgences were on the way. The major Reformation thinkers and their doctrines are folded in.
Probably most of this is standard. I think Boyce’s thinking is more original when he gets to the secular world. Hobbes essential view of man is that he was vicious and brutal; Hume saw reason as a slave to willfulness and passion; Adam Smith thought man was essentially selfish and self-interested; and even Benjamin Franklin thought that the American Constitution needed to be written in a way that would manage man’s inherent sinfulness. Nietzsche and Freud are here, too. I’m not naming them all. But Boyce argues that these important thinkers were all inheritors of Augustinian thought: human nature is wayward and selfish and some remedy is needed, even if they disagreed on the remedy.
Original sin is not discussed much anymore. Boyce explains that the underlying concept is still very present, though. Contemporary evangelism has just shifted from sinner to Satan to explain the same thing. And Dawkins has just re-purposed the doctrine as the selfish gene. Quite interesting.
I’ve never read anything by James Boyce before and know nothing of his standing to write such as book as this one. I discovered he’s a Research Associate in the School of Geography and Environmental Studies at the University of Tasmania no less. Not exactly the credentials or the background you’d expect for the author of a book about original sin. Nevertheless he’s put forth some interesting arguments, lucidly; and, after all, he isn’t writing theology but a history of ideas.
Boyce begins with Augustine of Hippo and shortly thereafter contrasts Augustine’s views with Pelagius. I googled him: “Scottorum pultibus praegravatus,” a source said and translated the phrase to “weighted down by Irish porridge.” Was this a joke? Anyway Augustine won the day; Pelagianism was designated a heresy. It wasn’t okay to deny original sin, predestination, or the need for Christian grace. Boyce takes us through the creation stories of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 and the various Church fathers (and one mother) such as Anselm, Aquinas, Julian of Norwich, to name just a few. They didn’t all agree with Augustine’s views. He explains how infant baptism changed from a blessing on the child to as good a salvific measure as anxious parents could receive since their child was already doomed. The Roman Catholic Church was now micro-managing salvation and indulgences were on the way. The major Reformation thinkers and their doctrines are folded in.
Probably most of this is standard. I think Boyce’s thinking is more original when he gets to the secular world. Hobbes essential view of man is that he was vicious and brutal; Hume saw reason as a slave to willfulness and passion; Adam Smith thought man was essentially selfish and self-interested; and even Benjamin Franklin thought that the American Constitution needed to be written in a way that would manage man’s inherent sinfulness. Nietzsche and Freud are here, too. I’m not naming them all. But Boyce argues that these important thinkers were all inheritors of Augustinian thought: human nature is wayward and selfish and some remedy is needed, even if they disagreed on the remedy.
Original sin is not discussed much anymore. Boyce explains that the underlying concept is still very present, though. Contemporary evangelism has just shifted from sinner to Satan to explain the same thing. And Dawkins has just re-purposed the doctrine as the selfish gene. Quite interesting.
February 12, 2020
The author traces the journey from Adam and Eve through St Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Wesley and more, all the way to Adam Smith, Billy Graham and on to Richard Dawkins in his story of the concept of original sin and its influence over 1500 years. I have learned so much from this book but one fascinating piece of information is that "In God We Trust" only became America's motto in 1956, subsequent to the Billy Graham crusades from 1947 and every year from then on. The founding fathers were particular in not mentioning God in any of the original documents because of their agnosticism and their strong desire for separation of church and state. Then along comes Billy, who wheedled his way into every White House until his son Franklin took over the family business and continues to this day. The chapters on early Protestantism were absorbing and I couldn't help seeing the face of Eric Abetz, (small eyes, tight mouth, grim) whenever those hardline witch-burning Scottish Protestants were mentioned. So perhaps this Tasmanian author was thinking of that connection as he typed. Wesley bragged that none of his 10 children dared cry after the age of one as he deliberately 'crushed their spirit'. One daughter eloped and had a child but the father failed to marry her and she went home in disgrace, only to be refused entry. She married a local plumber and was the victim of domestic violence from then on, losing subsequent children to miscarriage. I will reread this book again soon, it is one of the most enlightening (no pun intended) philosophical books I have read in quite a while.
Read
August 17, 2023"Christianity is our world.... Our whole science, everything that passes through our head, has inevitably gone through this history." -Jung
Basically two very short books in one—the first traces the development of original sin through Christian history, and the second examines the impact of this idea on Western culture more broadly. So for example it looks at Adam Smith's ideas on human nature in the formation of capitalism, the founding fathers' in developing the Constitution, Darwin's theory of self-interested competition, Freud and the divided self... etc, all as permutations of the doctrine of original sin.
Yet another book that I read at a critical moment in my life, as it forced me to ask what it even means to be "not Christian" in a culture that is so thoroughly saturated by Christian ideology. You can take the person out of a distinctly Christian context, it seems, but taking Christianity out of the person is a different matter entirely. Better in my view to critically engage with it in some way than to be unconsciously assimilated into it
Basically two very short books in one—the first traces the development of original sin through Christian history, and the second examines the impact of this idea on Western culture more broadly. So for example it looks at Adam Smith's ideas on human nature in the formation of capitalism, the founding fathers' in developing the Constitution, Darwin's theory of self-interested competition, Freud and the divided self... etc, all as permutations of the doctrine of original sin.
Yet another book that I read at a critical moment in my life, as it forced me to ask what it even means to be "not Christian" in a culture that is so thoroughly saturated by Christian ideology. You can take the person out of a distinctly Christian context, it seems, but taking Christianity out of the person is a different matter entirely. Better in my view to critically engage with it in some way than to be unconsciously assimilated into it
December 30, 2023
Do I have to review this? No.
Enjoy learning about sin, but do the right thing.
Enjoy learning about sin, but do the right thing.
November 20, 2025
This is a good book. My main criticism is that it was just too much. I have been a church goer since 1949. It is now 2025. I don't when I was first introduced to the doctrine of original sin, but for many, many years I just accepted that as an absolute truth. Several years ago I began to question its validity. I had learned that not everything I had learned in Sunday School was true. Reading, discussions, and careful thought had brought me to the conclusion that renowned Biblical scholars were looking at the Bible in new ways. I eventually reached the point of Original Sin. 1. This concept is NOT Biblical. It is never ever mentioned in the Bible. 2. Its basis comes from interpreting one of many many creation stories. And they are just that, stories with no factual basis . 3. How could a God whose chief message was love condemn the entire human race on the basis of one mythical man? I was thrilled when my pastor mentioned during a discussion, I don't remember about what, that he did not believe in original sin. WOW! I was not alone in rejecting this doctrine. All of this led me to this book. It was interesting to read how this doctrine came about, how it could have been rejected, how other Christian cultures did reject it. This book was a little deep for me in some of the history, but it validated my belief. One other thing that caused me to give this. 3+ instead of a 4- was the chapter on the 20th century and that Original Sin had by and large been repudiated. That's my lifetime and it was presented to me for well into the 21st century as "gospel."
February 2, 2018
I want to say that I did enjoy reading this book; however, I believe Boyce does offer a commonly misunderstood explanation of what is referred to as "original sin" and how it has apparently altered the mindset of millions of people today. There is some truth to Boyce's reasoning in terms of teachings from Christianity's early church leaders, but original sin itself is so much more than the "fast food" version many describe today. Either way, one must account for evil in the world where in a godless universe, all bets are truly off.
June 6, 2017
I was very keen to read this one as I consider his two previous books; "Van Diemans Land" and "1835" as brilliant feats of historical scholarship. I don't think this one is quite to that standard, but it is still very good and provides much food for thought. I think I want to reread it a little later and then think carefully about some of his arguments. There are endless implications to his arguments.
March 20, 2019
The amazing influence of a biblical story's interpretation, for far too long.
Read
December 21, 2016I don't feel qualified to rate this book since 1) I read it over a period of about 6 weeks so I don't recall the early chapters very well anymore, and 2) I don't know enough about the subject to assess whether Boyce is summarizing the consensus view on these historical figures (if there is one) or presenting his own perspective based on his study of their texts. I was interested in this book when it first came out, then later took it off my "To Read" list because the ratings were poor, then came across a copy of it at a used book store and decided to try it anyway. Boyce is not a historian of religion (but he is a historian). This is a survey that spans 2,000 years and so can't linger long with any one historical figure or perspective. However, that does make it a pretty user-friendly read, if you like history.
October 3, 2017
"In postulating a 'religion for atheists', Alain de Botton points to the paradox that 'Christianity never sounds more beguiling than when it ... acknowledges that we are all in the end rather infantile, incomplete, unfinished, easily tempted and sinful.' He suggests, much as Augustine did to Julian, that 'being repeatedly informed of our native decency can cause us to become paralysed with remorse over our failure to measure up to the impossible standards of 'integrity'" ... "The too rarely realised potential of original sin has been to undermine all attempts to separate not just 'us' and 'them', but 'me' and 'you'. Xenophobic creeds become vulnerable when it is acknowledged that 'the line separating good and evil runs ... inside every human heart'. For all its grotesque limitations, God's view of humanity in the Western Christian tradition was remarkably democratic."
January 8, 2016
Born Bad provided great insight on how the concept of original sin has shaped the Western World. He described with sufficient evidence that even athiests had subconciously accepted the philosophy of original sin. Great read.
May 10, 2015
Comment later
May 1, 2025
Engaging enough to keep me turning the pages.
August 14, 2015
Somewhat cursory. No index.
Displaying 1 - 25 of 25 reviews