Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Original sin
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
====Post-conciliar developments==== Soon after the [[Second Vatican Council]], biblical theologian [[Herbert Haag]] raised the question; "Is original sin in Scripture?"{{sfn|Haag|1966}} According to his exegesis, {{bibleverse|Genesis|2:25}} would indicate that Adam and Eve were created from the beginning naked of the [[divine grace]], an originary grace that, then, they would never have had, and much less would have lost due to the subsequent events narrated. On the other hand, while supporting a continuity in the Bible about the absence of [[preternatural]] gifts ({{langx|la|dona praeternaturalia}}),{{sfn|Haag|1966|pp=11, 49β50}} with regard to the [[Serpents in the Bible#Eden|ophitic event]], Haag never makes any reference to the discontinuity of the loss of access to the [[Tree of life (biblical)|tree of life]]. {{bibleverse|Genesis|2:17}} states that, if one ate the fruit of the [[tree of the knowledge of good and evil]], one would surely die, and the adverb indicates that, by avoiding this type of choice, one would have the possibility but not the certainty of accessing to the other tree. Therefore, in 1970 Latin American biblical scholar Carlos Mesters wondered if "Eden [is] golden age or goad to action", [[wikt:protology|protology]] or [[eschatology]], nostalgia for an idealized past or hope for something that has yet to happen as it is claimed by {{bibleverse|Revelation|2:7}} and {{bibleverse|Revelation|22:2}}.{{sfn|Mesters|1970|pp=}} Some warn against taking Genesis 3 too literally. They take into account that "God had the church in mind before the foundation of the world" (as in {{bibleverse|Ephesians|1:4}}{{sfn|Ritenbaugh}} as also in {{bibleverse|2 Timothy|1:9}}, "...his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus ''before'' the world began."{{sfn|Institute for Creation Research}} In his 1986 book ''{{'}}In the Beginning...{{'}}'', [[Pope Benedict XVI]] referred to the term "original sin" as "misleading and unprecise".{{sfn|Ratzinger|1986|p=72}} Benedict does not require a literal interpretation of Genesis, or of the origin of evil, but writes, "How was it possible, how did it happen? This remains obscure. Evil is not logical. Only God and good are logical, are light. Evil remains mysterious. It is presented as such in great images, as it is in chapter 3 of Genesis, with that scene of the two trees, of the serpent, of sinful man: a great image that makes us guess but cannot explain what is itself illogical."{{sfn|Benedict XVI|2008}}
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Original sin
(section)
Add topic