"Sinners, Saints and Free Will?"

Photo by Javier Allegue Barros on Unsplash

The words “sinner,” “saint,” and “free will” are very common terms. They are used in everyday speech such as – “she’s a saint” or “he had the free will or free choice to choose what he did,” or, “he chose to do it.” But why are these terms so ingrained in American culture and are they part of the overall human experience?

Over a very long time – really hundreds of thousands of years, human beings have developed a sense of what is right and what is wrong. Some scientists suggest that this is a result of evolution. The theory is that since humans have always organized in groups, understanding right and wrong became necessary for survival. This appreciation promotes social integration and helps groups of humans to survive in an otherwise hostile world. Supporting this is the fact that even infants and toddlers show some aspects of comprehending right and wrong. Even some animals seem to display rudimentary understandings of right and wrong. Anyone who has ever owned a dog can probably attest to this.

But the concepts of right and wrong are very advanced in human beings and it is really complex. This is a curious thing. To be sure, a lot of religions fully developed the ideas of right and wrong and put great emphasis into it. In fact, every religion has a concept of right and wrong, and many refer to doing wrong

deeds as sin or they use a similar term.

The idea of free will or free choice – the idea of choosing between right and wrong varies considerably depending on cultures and religions. It also depends upon the individual person who can be subject to a wide variety of circumstances including such influences as the condition of their body and brain, their environment, their family upbringing, their living situation and their affluence or poverty and a lot more.

Eastern religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and some followers of Taoism believe in samsara – a karmic cycle where a person’s actions or inactions in life lead to consequences in the next life. In other words, what happens to you in this life whether it be positive or negative is the result of choices you made in a previous life.

The Hindu word for sin is “paap” and it is actions that cause harm to another person. Not only does sin or paap result in karma that affects a future life, it also hinders spiritual growth and causes a person to distance themselves from God. Remember, I have mentioned before that Hindus do believe in an ultimate reality that they call God or Brahman but they also believe because God is unknowable, it manifests itself in millions of gods and goddesses that people can relate to.

Buddhists also have a notion of sin which they call papa. Buddhist concepts of sin or papa are actions that likewise create karma which will affect a future life. Buddhists do not believe in a god as such but they, like Hindus do believe in an ultimate reality so sin or papa in Buddhism are actions that prevent a person from merging with ultimate reality and attaining nirvana which is ultimate bliss.

The main difference in this regard is that Hindus believe every person has a soul called an atman – which is the essence of what is you. Your atman’s ultimate journey is to merge with God/Brahman/ultimate reality which means achieving moksha which is ultimate bliss. For Buddhists, there is no soul. The idea of you having a uniqueness or individual self is an illusion according to Buddhists. The goal of an enlightened person is to achieve nirvana which is a realization you do not exist and what you think is you is only part of ultimate reality. Hindu and Buddhist “sins” are very similar to those in western religions. They agree, in theory, with the ten commandments.

Western religions wholly embraced the ideas of sin. This began with Judaism. Sins in ancient Judaism were and are actions that fail to follow God’s law. These were clearly laid out in the ten commandments. But what a lot of folks do not realize is that there aren’t just ten commandments in Hebrew scripture - what is also called the Old Testament by Christians – there are 613 commandments as laid out in the Book of Leviticus. Violating any of these 613 commandments is a sin. It is important to realize that ancient Judaism had no concept of heaven and hell so sins affected your relationship with God in this life and could affect your life in a bad or good way.

As Christianity developed from Judaism, the idea of sin greatly expanded. Sometime around 300 BCE, the ideas of heaven and hell entered Judaism. Scholars believe these ideas came from Greek influence and, very likely, from the Persian influence of Zoroastrianism. From the sixth century BCE to the fourth century BCE or about 200 years the Persian Empire controlled the lands of Israel. The Persians believed in sin and in a heaven and hell. Some scholars believe that these Zoroastrian ideas of heaven and hell found their way into Judaism because of this Persian dominance over the lands of Israel. I think is exactly what happened.

Alexander the Great conquered the Persian Empire in 336 BCE. This included the lands of Israel. The Greeks believed in sin which were offenses against the gods and they believed in concepts similar to heaven and hell. The Greek god Hades was the god of the underworld later called hell by Jews and Christians. Heaven was called the Elysian Fields by the Greeks. Christianity expanded the Jewish notions of sin to include a belief in “original sin” which was originally promoted by St. Augustine in the fifth century CE and further developed by later theologians. Original sin is the idea that Adam and Eve sinned by eating the apple in the Garden of Eden as described in the Book of Genesis. Some Christian denominations really promote this. Martin Luther and John Calvin really emphasized it. They believed because of the original sin of Adam and Eve, all human beings are totally depraved and unworthy of God’s love or of going to heaven.

This includes newborn babies. Luther believed that only God’s grace could save a person from the fires of hell and it did not depend on the actions of a person during their lifetime. In his words, “a person is justified (meaning saved) by grace apart for works of law (actions that they take in their life.)

Calvin believed nothing a person could do would save them because God decided before the universe was created who would go to heaven and who would go to hell and it did not matter what you did in life. In order to go to heaven, you had to be one of the “elect,” one of those person’s God had predetermined would go to heaven. Both Calvin and Luther both took these ideas from the Letter of Paul to the Romans. In this letter, Paul emphasized the depravity of humans and the election of people to be saved by Jesus.

Catholicism further developed the idea of sin to include “mortal sin.” A mortal sin, according to Catholic doctrine is “a grievous offense, with sufficient reflection of possible actions and with full consent of one’s will.” Dying with an unforgiven mortal sin is a surefire way to go to hell according to Catholic doctrine.

Muslims also believe in sin which is a rejection of the commands of God as laid out in the Qur’an and in the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad as denoted in the Hadith which includes the sayings, pronouncements, and actions of the Prophet during this lifetime. While Muslims do believe Adam and Eve were the first humans and they sinned against God in the Garden of Eden, they do not believe in original sin.

The concept of “saints” is a bit easier to understand and less complicated than the varying ideas of sin. The world’s major religions all believe in similar ideas of what a saint is. This includes Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. In general, a saint is a person who has lived a life of extreme spiritual achievement which is defined in different ways by the different religions. In most cases, the person has led a virtuous life in service to others. They have led a life of compassion and selflessness. In some cases, they have performed miracles as they have helped others.

In Hinduism, saints are referred as saints or as gurus or swamis and many other names. In Buddhism, saints are called bodhisatvas, saints or arhats. Muslims refer to a saint as a “wali” or “a friend of God.”

The religious idea of “free will” that is “free choice” is that each individual has control over their life and can make choices in their life which can lead to adopting actions that create sin or actions that promote goodness and righteousness. In other words, a person has the control and power without external influences to choose actions that are helpful and loving or actions that are hurtful and cause harm to others and to the world.

How the world’s religions view free will varies considerably. Hindus do believe in free will and suggest that a person’s choice will impact their karma which will have concurrent consequences in a future life. Buddhists acknowledge people have some degree of free choice but maintain that a person’s actions are largely the

result of karma from a past life. In other words, a person may choose to do something because of actions from a previous incarnation.

The idea of free will in the western religions also varies substantially. Judaism, both ancient and modern, contends that people do have free choices and their actions create an accountability which will result in rewards or punishments – probably in this lifetime.

Catholicism fully emphasizes the idea of free will. What a person chooses and how they live their life will fully impact what happens to them when they die – whether they will go to heaven or to hell. Some other protestant denominations also believe this. However, Martin Luther and John Calvin did not believe human beings have free will. Luther believed that because of the sin of Adam and Eve, all human beings are bound by sin, and it is only through God’s grace and a wholehearted belief in Jesus that a person can be save from the fires of hell. In varying degrees, the Lutheran church today still believes this.

Calvin took it a step further and said the sin of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden meant that all human beings were totally depraved and only God’s forethought could save a person. As mentioned, Calvin believed that before the universe was created HE determined who was saved and who would go to hell and there was nothing you could do about it. Presbyterian, Calvinist, and most evangelical churches in America today still adhere to this principle although some are a bit more nuanced in this belief.

OK – so this explains the ideas of sin, saints and free will across cultures but why is this important? I think the reason it is important is for us to understand that these ideas have shaped cultures, societies, belief systems, values and ethics around the world and this is most definitely true here in America. In arriving at your own ideas of what is right and wrong, what is sin, is there such a thing as a saint and free will, it is important to consider all the ideas that may have had an influence on you whether you realize it or not.

You might immediately say that you reject Calvinist ideas given the central idea of predestination but guess what – these ideas have had a profound affect on the development of American values, including the creation of our political system. Remember, the Puritans who were so influential in New England for hundreds of years were entirely Calvinist. Working hard, living frugally, living a pious life were all Puritan Calvinist elements that have found their way into American culture.

Calvinists emphasized education, originally to be able to read and understand the Bible. This had a profound effect on universal education. New England was the first region in the world to mandate school for all children. Calvinists established Harvard and Yale more than 350 years ago. Calvinism called for limited government – since God was considered the highest power, no temporal power (like a king) could be supreme. Accordingly, Lutheran and especially Calvinist ideas fostered justification for the resistance to tyranny and ultimately led to the American revolution. Evangelicals today largely uphold Calvinist ideas.

It was actually a strong objection to many Calvinist ideas such as predestination that helped create the Unitarian and the Universalist movements in the later part of the 18 th century as I described in my last sermon. This was especially the ideas that human beings were totally depraved and incapable of goodness and salvation without grace from God.

So how does a modern liberal person consider the ideas of sinners, saints and free will? I think everyone would agree there is such a thing as the concept of sin but some would define this as simply an action or inaction that hurts other people. Sin, to some people is not necessarily an action that goes against a divinity – however this is described by the world’s religions.

Curiously, there are those in the scientific community that actually agree with Calvinists and Lutherans that there is no such thing as free will. Neurobiologist Robert Sapolsky, for example, contends human behavior and the choices a person makes are entirely dependent on their genetic makeup, their body chemistry and their environment which leaves no room for free will. If this is true, there is really no such thing as a sin or a saint either. It is all predetermined.

Well – if this is true, anything goes because you have no choice in the decisions you make. I find this theory entirely illogical. When you come to a stop sign – do you go or do you stop? According to Saposky’s reasoning, your choice is predetermined based on your genetics, your body chemistry and your environment.

It is not a choice you make.

Another consideration that refutes this determinist ideology is twin studies. My friend Josh is with us today. His father was a psychiatrist and worked at the National Institutes of Health. As I recall, one of the areas he was looking at during this work was the mental makeup of twins. Identical twins have the same genetics, the same body chemistry and very often the same environmental background and yet in some cases, twins become profoundly different people. In extreme cases, one becomes a priest and one becomes a hardened criminal. To me, this points to free will and choice. I don’t doubt the effects of genetics, body chemistry and environmental influences. They are real in my view. I just believe that, in the end, people, at least most people, can make choices and they are responsible for these choices. A deterministic viewpoint holds that people are not morally responsible for their actions because they have no free will or choice.

What about the idea of a saint? Are there really people who are saints? Well – Ihave to say yes. I have known people who are entirely selfless. People who are always kind and virtuous. People who think of others before they think of themselves. This is the definition of a saint. Most cultures and societies recognize there are people like this and this includes people who have come from a very difficult background and upbringing. The western religions suggest that someone who is like this, ie saintly, is someone who has accepted the influence of God and/or Jesus and/or Muhammed. Hindus and Buddhists contend that a saintly person has been influenced by the karma they have accumulated from previous lives. Secular humanists suggest a saintly person has adopted virtue and compassion because of all the factors of environment, body chemistry, upbringing, and possibly the choices they have made in life.

In my view, among other things, a spiritual person acknowledges that a person can choose actions or inactions that cause harm to others and to the world around them. In other words, a spiritual person acknowledges the possibility of sin although they may call it something else.

I think a spiritual person also acknowledges that they have free will and can make choices in their life that help or hurt people and the world around them. And they acknowledge that they are responsible for the choices they make.

I think a spiritual person also acknowledges the idea of sainthood – the idea that aperson can, through their free will and choices live a virtuous and compassionate life that makes a positive difference in the world.

Although a spiritual person may also subscribe to a particular religion, they do not have to. A person can be religious and spiritual but they can also just be spiritual. Remember, spirituality is a connection with other, defined so many different ways by sages, philosophers, holy people, and poets since the dawn of humanity. It is a very personal thing.

The concepts of sinners, saints and free will have been part of the human psyche and experience through all the stages of human development. They are an intrinsic part of our very being. As each of us develops our own spirituality and outlook on how to live our lives, it is important to consider them.

Reverend Christopher McMahon

UUMH

August 2025