Liberty University The Theological Studies of Saint Augustine in Relation to the Doctrine of Original Sin A Paper Submitted To Dr. John Landers In Partial Fulfillment for the Course CHHI-520 Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary By Jaaval Cato Lynchburg, Virginia October 7, 2012 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………. 3 AUGUSTINE’S TAKE ON ORIGINAL SIN…………………….. …………………….. ……. 5 AUGUSTINE’S TAKE ON ORIGINAL SIN AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO BAPTISM…………… 7 OPPOSTIONS TO AUGUSTINE’S VIEW ON ORIGINAL SIN ……………………… …… 0 MANICHEAN IMPACT ON AUGUSTINE’S VIEW OF ORIGINAL SIN… ………………. ……….. 11 PELAGIUS, CELESTIUS, AND JULIAN IN OPPOSITION WITH ORIGINAL SIN……………… 13 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………………………………….. 16BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………… …………………………………. 17 Introduction The doctrine of original sin has been deliberated by Theologians, as well as Augustine for over fifteen centuries, although it is evidently stated in Romans 5:12 by the Apostle Paul, “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned” (NRSV).
By this statement, the apostle Paul informs the reader that sin and death entered the world through one man (Adam), with the result of it permeating the whole of humankind like a poison. “The solidarity of the human race with Adam led Ambrose to say, ‘Adam existed, and in him we all existed… In Adam I fell, and in Adam I was cast out of Paradise, in Adam I died. ’” The doctrine of original sin has provoked much opposition amongst religious academia in regards to its teaching.
It is one of the most “baleful” of ideas says, one modern scholar; it is “repulsive” and “revolting” says another. I have seen it variously described as an insult to the dignity of humanity, an insult to the grace and loving kindness of God, and an insult to God and humankind alike. Aurelius Augustinus (Saint Augustine) has contributed significantly to the discussion that remains highly contested in our present day, which coincidently is not primarily exclusive of the church and those who disagree with him.
Augustine’s view of original sin was initially shaped by early life experience beginning with his own pagan immoral behavior as a youth in Africa, with his time studying Manichaeanism, and the Genesis account of Adam and Eve. Augustine although know for his writings on original sin was not the first to write about this subject matter, early church fathers such as Saint Ambrose the Bishop of Milan who subsequently was a mentor to Augustine and baptized him said in a commentary written on the Gospel of Luke “before we are born, we are all infected with the contagion of sin. Augustine provided much greater analysis ever-increasing and fine-tuning these thoughts from opinion into Christian dogma. In the biblical perspective, sin is not only an act of wrongdoing but a state of alienation from God. In reformed theology the doctrine of original sin has a firm biblical support: Genesis 3 where Adam and Eve trust the word of the serpent over the Word of God. Scripture also gives greater insight into the corruption initiated by Adam; this can be observed in two ways. First is the inherit sin caused by Adam, Romans 5:12-21 states that by one man was the 3 onduit in which sin entered the world. Secondly, Psalms 51:5 quotes Kind David as stating, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity and in sin my mother conceived me” (NASB). This statement references the sin all humankind has inherit from the one man (Adam), being passed from one generation to the next. Hence, the sin of Adam defiles all humanity including children, who have no other sins of their own. Therefore, all human beings are condemned because of the sin of Adam (“original sin”), which they bring with them and for which they become responsible, unless they are baptized.
Augustine writes in his Confession poising several rhetorical questions about the sin inherited by children stating, “Alas for the sins of men! Man saith this, and Thou dost compassionate him; for Thou didst create him, but didst not create the sin that is in him. Who bringeth to my remembrance the sin of my infancy? For before Thee none is free from sin, not even the infant which has lived but a day upon the earth. Who bringeth this to my remembrance? Doth not each little one, in whom I behold that which I do not remember of myself? In what, then, did I sin? Is it that I cried for the breast? Augustine goes even further alluding to the distress he brought upon his mother saying, “she did weep and mourn, and in her agony was seen the inheritance of Eve,—seeking in sorrow what in sorrow she had brought forth. ” The theme of being stained by sin will be broached by Augustine in other writings; such as, City of God, sermons, and letters addressing contemporaries who stood in opposition to his point of view. Augustine Bishop of Hippo began to institute his beliefs on how blemish of sin originating from Adam has corrupted the will of mankind; incidentally this ignited the argument 4 f his era that persists even in the present day church. There were many opponents who challenged Augustine, for instance fellow Bishops, Pelagius, the Donatist, the Manichaeism and the philosophers known as the Platonist. The latter, were two groups that Augustine earlier in his life were affiliated with; therefore, he comprised a detailed list of those proponents who opposed his belief on original sin in addition to other beliefs he held and debate one another, each contesting the others line of reasoning. In fact these debates continued between Augustine and his contemporaries up until his death in A.
D 540 having not completed his refutation of a Pelagian, Julian of Eclanum. Augustine and Julian debated such topics as the theory that grace was not necessary for saving action, free choice and will, baptism, and original sin. Julian would call the idea of original sin a contradiction of logic; being a prolific writer, Julian composed enough writings to comprise eight volumes all of which were sent to Augustine. Augustine was a hard worker and would write day and night, due to the large quantities of letters sent by Julian; Augustine spent a large amount of time in his latter days responding to Julian.
The time was a great lost and Augustine was unable to complete his final compilation of letters and comments on sermons to be added in his writings called Retratctiones. In this present day, the argument on original sin remains a topic of contention, both in churches (Protestants and Catholics) and in the academic world. If a question were poised to most church parishioners, asking them if they had a view about original sin, one might garner a wide variety of response. Some might say they have no knowledge of this topic, some may refer to scripture as presented by the Apostle Paul in Romans 5:12 believing that it was applicable to 5 hat era and not for the present, to a belief that original sin is a matter relating to physical gratification instead of it being a consequence of Adam’s sin. Augustine, by his own account sheds light on his own personal struggle with lust by including it in his argument on original sin and free will. Augustine clearly gives insight to this matter by stating that sin does not arise from the body’s assault upon the soul: bodily insubordination follows from the soul’s insubordination to God. This crucial matter is important in the life of all Christian believers, effecting their spiritual ormation and relationship with God. Augustine’s Take on Original Sin Based on his study of Genesis, chapter 1-3, Augustine formulated the foundation what most of Christianity recognizes today as the doctrine of sin. Augustine believed that Adam possessed original righteousness and perfection. He was immune from physical ills, surpassed all others in intellect, and was in a state of justification, illumination, and beatitude. The freedom Adam possessed was described by Augustine as posse non peccare (i. e. , able not to sin).
According to Augustine, the fall of Adam thwarted mankind’s ability of being unable to sin. For Augustine there are several factors that have contributed to this loss and the effects have been devastated for mankind. The cunning of evil, free will and the inborn will of mankind endows them the capability to persevere and prevail over sin. The essence of original sin consists of humanity’s participation in, and co-responsibility for, Adam’s perverse choice. All are one with Adam when he made his choice and therefore all willed in and with Adam. 6
Augustine focused on the will of man, believing that sin strongly affected and overpowered it primarily because of Adam’s sin. Consequently, humanity was left with little else then that day when they are called home to be with the Lord. Augustine reiterating that the pride of Adam – the deliberate choice to put his will above God’s Adam fell, and took us all with him into a fallen condition. Basically the only freedom mankind has is the freedom to sin, and the ability to receive the grace given by God. Augustine findings are not new discoveries; the topic had been proposed and argued centuries before Augustine.
Ireaneus of Lyons had similarly argued that the Genesis account and the disobedience of Adam (failing to obey God) brought about hereditary sin, corrupting the good work God had done. For by summing up in Himself the whole human race from the beginning to the end, He has also summed up its death. From this it is clear that the Lord suffered death, in obedience to His Father, upon that day on which Adam died while he disobeyed God. Augustine having been mentored by the Bishop of Milan, commonly known as Saint Ambrose may have acquired the point view that God held all mankind responsible for the disobedience and culpability of Adam.
The solidarity of the human race with Adam led Ambrose to say, “Adam existed, and in him we all existed… In Adam I fell, and in Adam I was cast out of Paradise, in Adam I died. ” Ambrose succeeded in opening the Scriptures for Augustine, arousing in him a desire to discover them for himself. City of God, written by Augustine, attributes disobedience to choice; “free will in arrogance and disobedience” will drive man to his death, this death not being from the natural, which was the 7 common view argued by Pelagius and his followers but as a direct result of man being rebellious to the commands of Yahweh.
Augustine also recognized that people being made in the image of God were distinct from the natural world, having a soul but not immortal as the angels, in-between. The Spiritual souls of human beings give access to a saving truth and goodness when they freely adhere to their Creator in friendship available through grace, which was restored by the second Adam, Christ. When man obeys they are granted immortality, as the Angels, and if they are disobedient they will die, not pertaining to the physical death of the body but a spiritual death (eternal separation from God).
Augustine’s Take on Original Sin and Its Relationship to Baptism. When points of view are constructed and formulated, most often realization and answers result. A derived result for Augustine was the relationship between original sin, and baptism, including infant. According to Catholic tradition infant baptism is a sacrament that must be carried out. Augustine was not the first to recognize this fact, similar to Irenaeus and his perception of original sin. Infant baptism had been practiced by the Roman Catholic Church centuries before Augustine composed his line of reasoning on baptism.
According to Augustine the only way to safe guard an infant child against the perils of sin was to baptize them. Augustine postulated that unless infants were baptized and partook of the Eucharist they would not have eternal life. Infants have been born guilty, due to their solidarity in Adam, and stand in need of redemption. When faced with the objection that infants must be exempt from original sin since they cannot will freely, Augustine replied that there is nothing absurd in speaking of their original sin as 8 voluntary since it is derived from the free act of their first parent.
Although Pelagius and Julian would contest this practice, the Catholic Church, and Protestant Orthodoxy (Anglican and Greek Orthodox) still practice infant baptism in this present time. Augustine recalls his own baptism, Ambrose the Bishop of Milan prepared Augustine for baptism. According to Paulinus, Ambrose was personally involved in initiating all catechumens. Though Ambrose and Augustine had little personal contact, they would have spent considerable time together during the period of Lent leading up to the Easter baptism…. eing baptized on Easter in the year A. D. 337. Augustine particular consideration to the baptizing of infants’ remains in controversy today, the Protestant Evangelical church does not hold to the doctrine of infant baptism; salvation is not contingent upon baptism or vice versa. Early on in his life Augustine while in his firt return trip to Africa, he thought it peculiar that infant baptism was practiced professing, “How could this be truly valuable, doing this to babies who have no understanding of what was going on. “Hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (Romans 5:5). Augustine comes to the conclusion that baptism brings the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This Gift which is the Holy Spirit is called by later theologians “uncreated grace. ” What Augustine calls the grace of caritas is called sanctifying or habitual grace in late theology… All sins are forgiven at baptism, that is to say, original sin and actual sins if the believer has committed them.
Nevertheless, Augustine as a new Bishop felt duty-bound to carry on with the ritual of baptizing infants. Infant baptism caused no harm both spiritually and physically, having an added advantage of removing the 9 blemish of the original sin inherited from Adam. Augustine viewed baptism as a sacrament of regeneration, “But the sacrament of baptism is undoubtedly the sacrament of regeneration: Wherefore, as the man who has never lived cannot die, and he who has never died cannot rise again, so he who has never been born cannot be born again.
From which the conclusion arises, that no one who has not been born could possibly have been born again in his father. Born again, however, a man must be, after he has been born; because, ‘Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God’ Even an infant, therefore, must be imbued with the sacrament of regeneration, lest without it his would be an unhappy exit out of this life; and this baptism is not administered except for the remission of sins. And so much does Christ show us in this very passage; for when asked, how could such things be?
He reminded His questioner of what Moses did when he lifted up the serpent. Inasmuch, then, as infants are by the sacrament of baptism conformed to the death of Christ, it must be admitted that they are also freed from the serpent’s poisonous bite, unless we willfully wander from the rule of the Christian faith. This bite, however, they did not receive in their own actual life, but in him on whom the wound was primarily inflicted. ” As the church began to grow and dominate pagan societies it is evident that infant baptism took root and became a normal sacramental ritual. ubsequently, this turned out to be discernible, established upon the reality that in the ancient church baptism existed as an induction ritual into the body of believers, and those infants that are born into the body of believers are so are baptized, signifying being a part of the community . Another aspect seems to have been the increase in awareness on the matter of original sin and the idea that baptism sluiced away the blemish of original sin. Finally, the rules initially were understood as actually conveying grace and accomplishing something spiritually.
Early on, approximately A. D. 400 Augustine petitions to the common observance of infant baptism as evidence that the church perceived infants to be born with the blemish of original sin. We find clear mention of infant baptism from Tertullian around A. D. 208. “The Lord does indeed say, forbid them not to come unto me. Let them come, 10 then, while they are growing up; let them come while they are learning, while they are learning whither to come; let them become Christians when they have become able to know Christ.
Why does the innocent period of life hasten to the remission of sins? ” Opposition to Augustine’s View of Original Sin In the course of Augustine ‘s life he spent a large quantity of his time contesting claims made by contemporaries of his day; such as, theologians, fellow Bishops, monks, and theorist. Of all his writing the most hotly contested was his writing on inherit sin (original sin) and his greatest opposition came from two men, Pelagius, and a follower of Pelagius, a man by the name of Julian of Eclanum who championed the priest’s ideas after his death.
In 412 Augustine single-handedly launched an attack on Pelagius and, until his death in 430; much of his energy was concentrated on writing many anti-Pelagian diatribes. Regarding that “arch-heretic” Augustine thundered: “How hostile to salvation by Christ is his poisonous perversion of the truth! ” Similarly, in modern times the same tactics take place in debate or public discourse on the idea of original sin, nonetheless, the preliminary groundwork can be attributed to Augustine compositions on the subject in the later 4th and early 5th centuries.
The Scripture Doctrine of Original Sin proposed to free and candid examination written by John Taylor is an example of contemporaries who contend with one another, his opponent was John Calvin’s and his writing on the doctrine of original sin. John Taylor like Augustine spends a great deal of time writing on the subject of original sin, particularly on the Genesis account; akin to Augustine, Taylor was enthused by the same section of scripture. In his reflection Taylor states, “Here observe, that for 11 nything that appears in the text, their sin the evil action they committed was personal-setting aside the tempter, no body committed that sinful act of disobedience but they themselves; first Eve and then Adam…the evil action was personal and committed by them so the punishment only belongs to them. ” This statement is evident to the opposing view to Augustine that Taylor had in regards to original sin, according to him Adams sin was not inherit in humanity or a legacy that all of humanity would have to contend with.
John Wesley in 1817 would write, The Doctrine of Original Sin: According to Scripture, Reason, and Experience, in Answer to Dr. Taylor was written nearly thirty years after the death of Taylor, confutes his ideology on original sin. Augustine a prolific writer composed many writings on multiple doctrines, his time as a Bishop was filled with effort to defend the faith against heresies from an earlier period in his life and those in his present. For example, the Donatist, Manichaeism, and Platonist Philosophies would impart and influence Augustine perception, life, and spiritual formation.
Bearing in mind that Augustine adhered to some of these ideas during his late teens through young adulthood it is important to discuss their effect on his underlying principle, appraisal, and system of belief. Manichean Influence on Augustine’s View on Original Sin “As a Catholic Christian reflecting on his Manichaean past, Augustine felt it was necessary to stay away from patterns that had encouraged his pride. Augustine’s writings, especially the Confessions, demonstrate that he came to believe that Manichaean’s in general, and he himself in particular, had taken great pride in their false wisdom, the status it brought 2 them, and their abilities to enlist more people into the sect. ” Although there is no evidence which may indicate a direct influence by this sect on Augustine’s point of view in regards to original sin, those in opposition to his view had speculated, possibly erroneously that a connection can be made, primarily because Augustine had such a harsh view on the Manichean. The main adherents to this speculation were the followers of Pelagius, “On account of a superficial resemblance between the doctrine of original sin and the Manichaeism theory of our nature being evil, the Pelagians accused the Catholics and St.
Augustine of Manichaeism. ” The proponents of Augustine have indicted him misguidedly, the belief that Augustine was the originator of the view on original sin and it being an offshoot of Manichaean fatalism. The apostle Paul speaks on the matter first and then Ireaneus of Lyons following in apostolic succession being trained by Polycarp goes on to quote the writings of Paul in Romans 5:12. Additionally, using the Genesis account, Ireaneus sought to bring cohesiveness to the argument in relation to the need of Christ saving fallen man and infant baptism many years before Augustine writes exhaustively and extensively on the topic.
The two main features of Manichaean doctrine were, “Light (good) and darkness (evil) both being equal, timeless, and in great conflict with each other…man is lost and fallen in existence, but in essence he is a particle of Light and thus one in substance with God. Individual salvation consists in grasping this truth by illumination from God’s Spirit; Christ appears as merely a prophet and is not really incarnate. ” The Gnostic form of belief (Manicheanism) did not believe in the redemptive work 13 f Christ nor did they observe the sacrament of baptism, therefore connecting Augustine writing on original sin to the Manichean belief on good and evil is ill-defined and wanders off the point when compared. Augustine as an older man admits his folly as a juvenile and young man studying the Manichean belief; recognizing his understanding about the nature of God was lacking to say the least because no one had ever educated t him otherwise. Therefore was I repelled by Thee, and Thou resistedst my changeable stiff neckedness; and I imagined corporeal forms, and, being flesh, I accused flesh, and, being “a wind that passeth away,” I returned not to Thee, but went wandering and wandering on towards those things that have no being, neither in Thee, nor in me, nor in the body. Neither were they created for me by Thy truth, but conceived by my vain conceit out of corporeal things. And I used to ask Thy faithful little ones, my fellow-citizens,—from whom I unconsciously stood exiled,—I used flippantly and foolishly to ask, “Why, then, doth the soul which God created err? But I would not permit any one to ask me, “Why, then, doth God err? ” And I contended that Thy immutable substance erred of constraint, rather than admit that my mutable substance had gone astray of free will, and erred as a punishment. ” This and others statements made by Augustine provide proof of him separating from the doctrine held by the Manicheans and it also demonstrates that the doctrine of original sin cannot be scrutinized in light of Manichaean doctrine or said influenced the doctrine of original sin.
Pelagius, Celestiu, and Julian in opposition with Original Sin. There were some who opposed Augustine position on original; however the writings we have today clearer places Pelagius, a disciple of Pelagius named Celestisus, and a Southern Italian Bishop, Julian of Eclanum as the primary opposition Augustine had to contend with in his day. Pelagius (360-420 A. D) was a religious British monk who was extremely distinctive from Augustine and his foundation influential dogma that traditional Western Christendom adheres to today.
A clash was inevitable and it came when Pelagius and his disciple Celestius left Italy in 14 409 in the face of an invasion and settled in Carthage, North Africa. The ensuing confrontation has since become known as the “Pelagian Controversy. ” The details of this controversy comprise of several facets, the relationship between God and humanity respecting the doctrines of free will, sin, and grace. Pelagius for all instance and purposes, absolutely believed that the sin Adam committed was not transmitted to all of Humanity. Nothing good, and nothing evil, on account of which we are deemed either laudable or blameworthy, is born with us, but is done by us: for we are born not fully developed, but with a capacity for either conduct; we are formed naturally without either virtue or vice; and previous to the action of our own proper will, the only thing in man is what God has formed in him. ” The statement made by Pelagius is in direct contention to the view of Original sin as presented by Augustine which held that the human will was incapable obtaining eternal life without the grace of God through Jesus Christ.
Additionally, Pelagius concept of original sin consisted in an “imitation” of Adam and can be eliminated by an “imitation” of Christ and also taught infant baptism was not needed for the remission of any “original guilt. ” This view of human nature received a great deal of criticism. Celestius, Pelagius, and their close associates were condemned at Carthage in C. E. 412. Other condemnations followed at Carthage and Milevum in 416 and at the great African council in Carthage in 418. The doctrine was finally anathematized at the Third Ecumenical Council at Ephesus in July of 431. 5 Augustine spent a great deal of time contending with the views held by Pelagius and others who followed his doctrine; Augustine was even asked by an imperial commissioner for instruction on how to deal with Pelagius. Augustine then after so much time disproving Pelagius had to vie with another antagonist, a Bishop and disciple of Pelagius, Julian of Eclanum. Julian Eclanum (c. 386- c. 455 A. D. ) promoted the belief’s of Pelagius several decades after his death. Julian expressed sharply his objection to the idea of a fundamental taint in human nature connected to Adam’s sin.
Julian was one of many who had a great deal of trepidation with the theology of Augustine and would write multiple volumes spurning Augustine’s doctrine. Julian made several charges against Augustine and the Catholic Church; however, he would focus primarily on Augustine view of grace, original sin, and infant baptism. Julian charged Augustine with relapsing back into Manichean fatalism by teaching on the need for grace. “Julian chief charge of Mancihesim is predominantly related to its position that there is an evil principle at war against the good principle.
He objected to Augustine’s doctrine of original sin as implying that all are born the power of the devil and have to be re-born in Christ. ” Julian like most followers of Pelagius considered the sin of Adam less grave than Cain’s murder of Abel as evil, along these lines of thinking Julian purports a question, “why would God punish Adam’s sin with quite disproportionate penalty? ” Answering the question states, that God would not; therefore, we have not inherited a skewed sinful nature from Adam. Additionally, going to say that man nature is similar to Adam before his fall, all people start off fall when it comes to sin.
These and other 16 charges made by Julian would be proved false by Augustine; nevertheless, Julian succeeded in causing great distraction and Augustine would spend the latter part of his life contending with the Pelagian disciple. Conclusion Augustine the Bishop of Hippo is considered one of the greatest church fathers and apologetics in all Christendom; he made an immense contribution to Church dogma, holding people in the early church accountable to scripture. Although his writings are now centuries old, have stood the test of time and provide fundamental essentials that the church today adheres too.
Like some before him, Irenaeus, Origen, Polycarp, and Ignatius, Augustine understood scripture as being delicately shrouded allegorical idioms, purposely arrange by God in order for man to seek Him out through inquiry. Augustine thorough inquiry attempted to focus on and solve many theological and existential questions that many then and many today ponder over. For instance, Augustine writes on the need for sacramental baptism, prevenient grace, freewill, evil, original sin, turmoil, tragedy, human nature, and false doctrine. The answers to these philosophical, heological, and spiritual questions would take a life-time for Augustine to traverse, establishing him solidly as a great apologist, theologian, and more importantly a man of God. Augustine’s theology was shaped and formed through early life experience. Being inclined to sin (lust of the flesh) saying of himself “so small a boy, so great a sinner” This brings to light a frame of thought Augustine details in two of his better known writings, City of God, and Confessions. In the compositions Augustine brings clarity and a deeper level of thought on multiple subjects, his candid memory illustrating his early innocence evolving, while 17 t the same time, providing great intellectual thought on substantive issues relating to scripture, dogma, heresies spiritual formation, faith, love, maturity, and much more, which would aid the church in its infancy. Overall Augustine presented a message that reiterated Romans 5:12, and the blessed hope (Christ) that all humanity is certain of, by God’s Grace to atone for our sins. 18 Bibliography Alan Jacobs. Original Sin, A Cultural History. 1st Edition. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2001. Ambrose, Saint (Bishop of Milan: Ide M. Ni Riain). Commentary of Saint Ambrose on the Gospel according to Saint Luke.
Halcyon Press in association with Elo Publications, 2001. Augustine, Saint. Confessions of Saint Augustine. Translated by Edward B. Pusey, D. D. Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library. Augustine, Saint, A Treatise on Nature and Grace in Nicene Post Nicene Fathers, trans. Peter Holmes, ed. Philip Schaff. Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library Augustine, Saint. On Forgiveness of Sin, and Baptism, translated by Phillip Schaff. Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library. Brown, Peter. Augustine of Hippo, a Biography. 2nd Edition.
Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 2000. Clark, Mary. Augustine. New York London: Continuum, 2001. Etwell, Walter A. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, Mich. Carlisle, Cumbria, U. K: Baker Academic Paternoster Press, 2001. Hall, Christopher. Learning Theology with the Church Fathers. Downers Grove, Ill: Intervarsity Press, 2002. Harent, S. “Original Sin. ” Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. Hiestand, Gerald. “Augustine and the justification debates: appropriating Augustine’s doctrine of culpability. Trinity Journal 28, no. 1 (March 1, 2007): 115-139. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 7, 2012). Irenaeus of Lyons, Irenaues Against Heries: Ante- Nicene Church Fathers, Philip Schaff, ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library. McCann, C. (2009). Influence of Manichaeism on Augustine of Hippo as a spiritual mentor. Cistercian Studies Quarterly, 44(3), 255-277. Nassif, Bradley L. “Toward a “catholic” understanding of St Augustine’s view of original sin. ” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 39, no. 4 (January 1, 1984): 287-299.
ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 7, 2012). 19 Papageorgiou, P. (1995). Chrysostom and Augustine on the Sin of Adam and Its Consequences. St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 39(4), 361-378. Phipps, William E. “The heresiarch : Pelagius or Augustine?. ” Anglican Theological Review 62, no. 2 (April 1, 1980): 124-133. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 7, 2012). Smither, Edward. Augustine as Mentor: A Model for Preparing Spiritual Leaders. Nashville, Tenn: B ; H Academic, 2008 Taylor, John.
The Doctrine of Original Sin Proposed to Free and Candid Examination. London: New Castle, 1845. Tertullian, Tertullian on Baptism. Translated by Rev. S. Thelwall. Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library. ——————————————– [ 1 ]. Nassif, Bradley L. “Toward a “catholic” understanding of St Augustine’s view of original sin. ” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 39, no. 4 (January 1, 1984): 287-299. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 7, 2012). [ 2 ]. Alan Jacobs, Original Sin, A Cultural History (New York, NY: Harper Collins, 2001), ix. [ 3 ].
Gerald Hiestand, “Augustine and the justification debates: appropriating Augustine’s doctrine of culpability. ” Trinity Journal 28, no. 1 (March 1, 2007): 115-139. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 7, 2012). [ 4 ]. Mary Clark, Augustine (New York London: Continuum, 2001), 2-3. [ 5 ]. Edward Smither, Augustine As Mentor: A Model for Preparing Spiritual Leaders (Nashville, Tenn: B & H Academic, 2008), 103. [ 6 ]. Ide M. Ni Riain Saint Ambrose (Bishop of Milan), Commentary of Saint Ambrose on the Gospel according to Saint Luke (Halcyon Press in association with Elo Publications, 2001). 7 ]. Walter Elwell, Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids, Mich. Carlisle, Cambria, and U. K: Baker Academic Paternoster Press, 2001), 1103. [ 8 ]. Ibid, 1103 [ 9 ]. P. Papageorgiou. (1995). Chrysostom and Augustine on the Sin of Adam and Its Consequences. St Vladimir’s Theological Quarterly, 39(4), 361-378. [ 10 ]. Augustine, Saint. Confessions of Saint Augustine. translated by Edward B. Pusey, D. D. (Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library), Book 1, 7 [ 11 ]. Ibid, Confessions Book V, 8 [ 12 ]. Mary Clark, Augustine (New York London: Continuum, 2001), 50-51. 13 ]. Ibid, 121-123. [ 14 ]. Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo, a Biography, 2nd Edition (Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 2000), 419. [ 15 ]. Clark, 55. [ 16 ]. Bradley L Nassif. “Toward a “catholic” understanding of St Augustine’s view of original sin. ” Union Seminary Quarterly Review 39, no. 4 (January 1, 1984): 287-299. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 7, 2012). [ 17 ]. Nassif, 287-299. [ 18 ]. B. J. Gundlach and Walter A. Etwell ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology: Augustine of Hippo (Grand Rapids, Mich. Carlisle, Cumbria, U.
K: Baker Academic Paternoster Press, 2001), 123. [ 19 ]. Irenaeus of Lyons, Irenaues Against Heries: Ante- Nicene Church Fathers, Philip Schaff, ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library), Book V, chapter 23. [ 20 ]. Nassif, 287-299. [ 21 ]. Edward Smither, Augustine as Mentor: A Model for Preparing Spiritual Leaders. Nashville (Ten: B & H Academic, 2008), 104. [ 22 ]. Saint Augustine, Concerning the City of God, trans. Rev Marcus Dodds, D. D. (Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library), Book XII, 22. [ 23 ]. Clark, 95. [ 24 ]. Nassif, 287-299. 25 ]. Smither, 107-108. [ 26 ]. Brown, 387. [ 27 ]. Clark, 46. [ 28 ]. Saint Augustine, On Forgiveness of Sin, and Baptism, translated by Phillip Schaff (Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library), 43:27 [ 29 ]. Tertullian, Tertullian on Baptism, translated by Rev. S. Thelwall (Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library), Book 2. [ 30 ]. William E Phipps. “The Heresiarch: Pelagius or Augustine? ” Anglican Theological Review 62, no. 2 (April 1, 1980): 124-133. ATLA Religion Database with ATLASerials, EBSCOhost (accessed October 7, 2012). [ 31 ].
John Taylor The Doctrine of Original Sin Proposed to Free and Candid Examination, (London: New Castle, 1845), 6-7. [ 32 ]. C. McCann, (2009). Influence of Manichaeism on Augustine of Hippo as a spiritual mentor. Cistercian Studies Quarterly, 44(3), 255-277. [ 33 ]. Harent, S. “Original Sin. ” Catholic Encyclopedia. (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911). Retrieved October 7, 2012 from New Advent: www. newadvent. org/cathen11312. htm. [ 34 ]. W. A. Hoffecker,. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Walter A. Elwell ed. Grand Rapids, Mich (Carlisle, Cumbria, U. K: Baker Academic Paternoster Press, 2001), 729. 35 ]. Augustine, Confession, Book IV, 15. [ 36 ]. Nassif, 287-299. [ 37 ]. Ibid. [ 38 ]. Augustine, “A Treatise on Nature and Grace” in Nicene Post Nicene Fathers, trans. Peter Holmes, ed Philip Schaff (Grand Rapids, MI: Christians Classics Ethereal Library), book V, 14. [ 39 ]. Mary Clark, Augustine (New York London: Continuum, 2001), 48. [ 40 ]. Nassif, 287-299. [ 41 ]. Clark, 48. [ 42 ]. Hall, Christopher. Learning theology with the church fathers. Downers Grove (Ill: InterVarsity Press, 2002), 134. [ 43 ]. Clark 50-51 [ 44 ]. Hall, 146. [ 45 ]. Ibid [ 46 ]. Clark, Augustine, 2.