“And is there not just as much reason to urge this objection
against the theory just named? Its advocates hold that God brings
the whole human race into existence without holiness, and with
such propensities and in such circumstances as will certainly lead
them into sin; and that he brings them into this fearful condition
in consequence of the sin of their first father, without any fault
of their own. Now, as far as the divine justice or goodness is
concerned, what great difference is there between our being
depraved at first, and being in such circumstances as will
certainly lead to depravity the moment moral action begins? Will
not the latter as infallibly bring about our destruction as the
former? And how is it more compatible with the justice or the
goodness of God to put us into one of these conditions than into
the other, when they are both equally fatal? It is said that our
natural appetites and propensities and our outward circumstances
do not lead us into sin by any absolute or physical necessity; but
they do in all cases certainly lead us into sin, and God knows
that they will when he appoints them for us. Now, how can our
merciful Father voluntarily place us, while feeble, helpless
infants, in such circumstances as he knows beforehand will be the
certain occasion of our sin and ruin?... What difference does it
make, either as to God’s character, or the result of his
proceedings, whether he constitutes us sinners at first, or
knowingly places us in such circumstances that we shall certainly
become sinners, and that very soon? Must not God’s design as to
our being sinners be the same in one case as in the other; and
must not the final result be the same? Is not one of these states
of mankind fraught with as many and as great evils as the other?
What ground of preference then would any man have?...
“Let intelligent, candid men, who do not believe either of these
schemes, say whether one of them is not open to as many objections
as the other.”
The idea of a preëxistence of the race _before_ Adam, is not held by any
denomination.
Thus it appears that whenever any person claims that each of these
attempts to make the Augustine theory, as held by the great Christian
sects, consistent with the moral sense of humanity is an utter failure, he
is sustained by _a majority_ of the most learned and acute theologians of
our age and nation.
CHAPTER VIII. THE AUGUSTINIAN THEORY CONTRARY TO THE MORAL SENSE OF
MANKIND.
Having presented evidence that both Catholics and Protestants of Europe
and America unite in holding the Augustinian theory of the origin of evil,
and also that theologians themselves find it indefensible, the next aim
will be to present a portion of the evidence to show that this system is
at war with the moral feelings and common sense of mankind.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account