Scholarlink

<p>This article examines the importance of the historical fall and doctrine of original sin in context of allegorical doctrines of the fall and sin. The article provides a moderate defense of a historic fall by critiquing what I shall dub <i>Allegorical Accounts</i>. Contemporary <i>Allegorical Account</i>s of the fall and original sin deny that any historical fall of our human ancestors occurred. These accounts also affirm that all individuals require Christ’s atoning work for sin, freely fall into sin, and are not created sinful or determined to fall into sin. I challenge the <i>Allegorical Account</i>. Given any <i>Allegorical Account’s</i> claims about the fall and original sin, I propose a set of jointly inconsistent propositions which I label as <i>Atonement for All</i>, <i>Good Creation</i>, and <i>Time-Gap</i>. If one assumes the <i>Allegorical Account</i>, any two propositions of the set will imply the falsity of the third. However, each of the three propositions is plausible. I examine possible modifications to avoid the inconsistency or conduct damage control—each of these is found wanting. Since these propositions are jointly inconsistent when one assumes an <i>Allegorical Account</i>, the article suggests that non-<i>Allegorical Accounts</i> of the fall and original sin may be theologically more important than recently regarded.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A moderate defense of the fall and original sin

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年3月19日

查看全文
  • T. Parker Haratine

摘要

This article examines the importance of the historical fall and doctrine of original sin in context of allegorical doctrines of the fall and sin. The article provides a moderate defense of a historic fall by critiquing what I shall dub Allegorical Accounts. Contemporary Allegorical Accounts of the fall and original sin deny that any historical fall of our human ancestors occurred. These accounts also affirm that all individuals require Christ’s atoning work for sin, freely fall into sin, and are not created sinful or determined to fall into sin. I challenge the Allegorical Account. Given any Allegorical Account’s claims about the fall and original sin, I propose a set of jointly inconsistent propositions which I label as Atonement for All, Good Creation, and Time-Gap. If one assumes the Allegorical Account, any two propositions of the set will imply the falsity of the third. However, each of the three propositions is plausible. I examine possible modifications to avoid the inconsistency or conduct damage control—each of these is found wanting. Since these propositions are jointly inconsistent when one assumes an Allegorical Account, the article suggests that non-Allegorical Accounts of the fall and original sin may be theologically more important than recently regarded.