ORIGINAL SIN OR ORIGINAL SINFULNESS? A COMMENT
My purpose is to defend Augustine's doctrine of original sin against Joseph Fitzpatrick in his series of articles in New Blackfriars (July 2009–Jan 2010). I begin by arguing that Fitzpatrick's criticisms of it as psychologically inadequate fail because they do not take seriously enough the...
| Главный автор: | |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Электронный ресурс Статья |
| Язык: | Английский |
| Проверить наличие: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Опубликовано: |
2013
|
| В: |
Heythrop journal
Год: 2013, Том: 54, Выпуск: 1, Страницы: 55-69 |
| Online-ссылка: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Не электронный вид
|
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1781963274 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20211211043419.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 211211s2013 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/j.1468-2265.2009.00639.x |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1781963274 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1781963274 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Heans, Simon |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 109 | |a Heans, Simon | ||
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a ORIGINAL SIN OR ORIGINAL SINFULNESS? A COMMENT |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2013 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a My purpose is to defend Augustine's doctrine of original sin against Joseph Fitzpatrick in his series of articles in New Blackfriars (July 2009–Jan 2010). I begin by arguing that Fitzpatrick's criticisms of it as psychologically inadequate fail because they do not take seriously enough the metaphysical structure of this doctrine, viz, creation from nothing. The second part begins with a critique of Fitzpatrick's interpretation of Genesis 3 and continues with a critical analysis of his proposed alternative to Augustine on original sin (‘original sinfulness’) with reference to the scriptural passages he cites in its support. The conclusion I reach is that ‘original sinfulness’ is not an acceptable biblical hermeneutic. In the third section, I discuss Fitzpatrick's concept of ‘prototypical action’ and, using recent work of Carol Harrison on Augustine's early theological writings, I argue that, far from being incompatible with Augustine's theology of original sin, as Fitzpatrick maintains, this concept enables us to understand Augustine's position in a way that overcomes Fitzpatrick's objections to it. | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Heythrop journal |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1960 |g 54(2013), 1, Seite 55-69 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320573052 |w (DE-600)2016721-0 |w (DE-576)094425485 |x 1468-2265 |7 nnas |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:54 |g year:2013 |g number:1 |g pages:55-69 |
| 776 | |i Erscheint auch als |n Druckausgabe |w (DE-627)1633297098 |k Non-Electronic | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2265.2009.00639.x |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |7 1 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2265.2009.00639.x |x Verlag |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |7 1 |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4019096252 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1781963274 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20211211043419 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 211211||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-09#B17BA086B8EF80E500D755479FCE8483D923757B | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
| LOK | |0 939 |a 11-12-21 |b l01 | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
