From: Robert Schneider (rjschn39@bellsouth.net)
Date: Mon Oct 06 2003 - 11:33:48 EDT
See my comments, below Blake and Ted's messages:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dr. Blake Nelson" <bnelson301@yahoo.com>
To: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: Original Sin (was Re: RATE)
> I am sure George M. has more to offer than I, but I
> wanted to correct my last post and comment on Ted's.
>
> I meant Tertullian, not Origen. The doctrine in the
> Western Church stems from the dispute between
> Augustine and Pelagius. Even though some church
> fathers, prior to this point, held some beliefs that
> are associated with Original Sin, the doctrine that
> Augustine propounded was due, in part, to his not
> knowing Greek and not having read the Greek fathers.
>
> A quote from C. G. Bretschneider's Manual of Dogmatic
> History:
>
> "Neither the doctrine of Pelagius, nor that of
> Augustine, coincided entirely with the views of the
> ancient fathers. For the later Greek fathers
> [distinguishing from the early Greek fathers] had at
> least explained physical death to be a consequence of
> the fall, and some of them had admitted a growth. of
> moral deterioration originating from it; but it is
> also true that the Latin Church fathers had at least
> taught no imputation of Adam's guilt, no loss of free
> will, and no damnation of the race, already
> experienced in consequence of this birth from Adam.
> Pelagius and Augustine were both in the wrong when
> they each maintained that he had only followed the
> already established Church doctrine; but the greater
> wrong was on the side of Augustine. We must pardon him
> however for this because, being ignorant of the Greek
> language he had never read the Greek fathers."
>
> So, perhaps, Ted is right about some mistranslation
> along the way.
>
> --- Ted Davis <TDavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
> > Echoing what Blake Nelson just wrote, it is my
> > understanding that Augustine
> > and the western tradition actually mis-interpreted a
> > key Pauline text about
> > original sin, b/c they were working from the vulgate
> > rather than from the
> > original Greek text. I suspect that George Murphy
> > or someone else knows the
> > full story here and can illuminate us?
> >
> > ted
> >
>
Bob's comments:
Ted is correct about the mistranslation. I posted a note about this
over a year ago, but it will be easier for me to repeat it than try to track
it down in the archives. The passage in question is Romans 5:12. The Greek
text literally translated reads "Through one man sin entered the world, and
through sin death; and thus death came upon all men in that (Gk."eph' ho")
all sinned." But Augustine working from a faulty Latin translation, in
which "eph' ho" was translated "in quo," "in whom" (instead of the correct
translation "eo quod," "in that"), understood the "in whom" to refer to
Adam. Augustine used the passage to deny free will in this respect. He
also seemed to be working with a kind of "spiritual preformation" doctrine,
in supposing that all of subsequent humankind was in some way in the semen
of Adam , and thus inherited Adam's sin. In this respect he was strongly
opposed both by Pelagius and by his later champion Julian of Eclanum.
Bob Schneider
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 06 2003 - 11:38:01 EDT