Original Sin

If there is such a thing as “original sin,” is it a disease, or a decision?  If we all inherited a fallen nature from Adam, then that sounds much more like sin itself is a disease.  But if it’s a disease, how is God righteous in punishing a sickness?  Who would punish someone for an inherited sickness?  If it is a decision leading to willful disobedience, then one could see the justice in punishment.  But then, if it is a willful decision, then it is a choice belonging solely to that individual, and it is not inherited.  The idea of inherited rebellion against God does not make sense to me.

If our nature is corrupted as a result of one man’s choice, then how can we be judged as if the decision to be corrupted was ours alone?  If we are born fallen, then our nature is not a result of personal choices – rather, our personal choices are a result of our nature.  How is this translated to willful disobedience? 

Wouldn’t that be a bit like God instituting a command for us to not breathe air, but water, and then punishing us for not doing so? 

So, if sin is a decision of each individual, then sin is an offense that is justly punishable.  But then, the notion of it being inherited is tossed out the window. It is unust to make you go to jail if your father or mother committed murder.

If sin is a disease, then it must be healed, not punished.  But where does that leave us with notions such as hell, and rebellion against God, and such?

Just some preliminary thoughts on the subject.