involves personal guilt. Yet this depravity, so far as it is natural, wants the very conditions on which guilt depends. The only satisfactory explanation of this difficulty is the Christian doctrine of original sin. Here alone, if inner possibility can be maintained, can the apparently contradictory principles harmonize, viz.: the universal and deep-seated depravity of human nature, as the source of actual sin and individual responsibility and guilt.? These words, though written by one who advocates a different theory, are nevertheless a valuable argument in corroboration of the theory of Adam?s Natural Headship.

Thornwell, Theology, 1:343 ? ?We must contradict every Scripture text and every Scripture doctrine which makes hereditary impurity hateful to God and punishable in his sight, or we must maintain that we sinned in Adam in his first transgression.? Secretan, in his Work on Liberty, held to a collective life of the race in Adam. He was answered by Naville, Problem of Evil: ?We existed in Adam, not individually, but seminally. Each of us, as an individual, is responsible only for his personal acts or, to speak more exactly, for the personal part of his acts. But each of us, as he is man, is jointly and severally (solidairement) responsible for the fall of the human race.? Bersier, The Oneness of the Race, in its Fall and in its Future: ?If we are commanded to love our neighbor as ourselves, it is because our neighbor is ourselves.?

See Edwards, Original Sin, part 4, chap. 3; Shedd, on Original Sin, in Discourses and Essays, 218-271, and references, 261-263, also Dogmatic Theology, 2:181-195; Baird, Elohim Revealed, 410-435, 451-460, 494; Schaff, in Bibliotheca Sacra, 5:220, and in Lange?s Com., on <450512>Romans 5:12; Auberlen, Div. Revelation, 175-180; Philippi, Glaubenslehre, 3:28- 38, 204-236; Thomasius, Christi Person und Werk, 1:269-400; Martensen, Dogmatics, 173-183; Murphy, Scientific Bases, 262 sq., cf. 101; Birks, Difficulties of Belief, 135; Bp. Reynolds, Sinfulness of Sin, in Works, 1:102-350; Mozley on Original Sin, in Lectures, l36 ? l52; Kendall, on Natural Heirship, or All the World Akin, in Nineteenth Century, Oct. 1885:614-626. Per contra, see Hodge, Systematic Theology, 2:157-164, 227-257; Haven, in Bibliotheca Sacra, 20:451-455; Criticism of Baird?s doctrine, in Princeton Rev., Apr. 1860:335-376; of Schaff?s doctrine, in Princeton Rev., Apr. 1870:239-262.

We regard this theory of the Natural Headship of Adam as the most satisfactory of the theories mentioned and as furnishing the most important help towards the understanding of the great problem of original sin. In its favor may be urged the following considerations:

<- Previous Table of Contents Next ->

Was this article helpful?

0 0

Post a comment