The Original Sin: Incest and Its Meaning.W. Arens

1987 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 228-230
Author(s):  
Paul Heyer
Keyword(s):  
Original Sin

THE PARENT STYLE OR THE ORIGINAL SIN? ADAM REVIVED

1993 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-57
Author(s):  
EILEEN HARRIS
Keyword(s):  
Original Sin

“Corporate Finance and Original Sin”: Editors’ Response

2006 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
pp. 12-12
Author(s):  
Robert D. Arnott ◽  
Rodney N. Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Finance ◽  
Original Sin

Moving Forward

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Ruse
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Original Sin ◽  
Human History ◽  
Adam And Eve ◽  
Incarnational Theology ◽  
Constructive Engagement

The Augustinian vision of humankind, on which so much Christian thinking about war is based, is false. Thanks to Darwinian evolutionary biology we know there was no original couple, Adam and Eve; there was no eating of the apple; there is no original sin. We are not innately depraved in this way. Morbid fatalism is inappropriate. The killer-ape vision of humankind, on which so much Darwinian thinking about war is based, is equally false. Thanks to updated Darwinian evolutionary biology, we know that we did not evolve in the violent ways often presumed, and that in major respects we are designed to avoid war. Culture, particularly agriculture, changed much of that and war became common. Changing this is not to go against our nature. Naïve optimism is no more in place. There is hope of more constructive engagement between Christians and Darwinians. On the Christian side, there are alternative theologies to Augustinian Atonement theology, notable Incarnational theology, not dependent on a literal Adam and Eve. On the Darwinian side, there are fresh empirical findings and interpretations, with truer understandings of human history and nature. Perhaps now, together, we can move forward the debate on the nature and causes and possible ending of human warfare.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document