Hi all, I'm a bit concerned;
I had a Systematic Theology Lecture last night, in which the lecturer was discussing apparently diferrent views on "original sin"
He referred to Adam's sin being imputed to the entire human race, and basically dismissed that. Then he said, "Another view is that Adam was the Federal Head of the human race," he said that idea was based on a dubious interpretation of a text in romans, I didn't write down what he referred to, but I can recall it was somewhere in Romans 5. So he rejected the idea thatAdam was acting federally.
He then went on to promote the view of Pascal on original sin.
I maintain whole heartedly that Adam was acting federally when representing the human race, and that Adams sin was imputed to the entire human race, so I'm not confused about that, but I'm curious to see what people thought he meant when he dismissed the idea in favour of pascal's view. I look up Parcal and see Pascals wager, but nothing on the concept of original sin, and its transmission, and how Adams act affected the human race.
On an unrelated question, earlier in the same lecture he said that the husband and wife relationship was a 'poor reflection' of the relationship between the Father and the Son in the Trinity, and based that concept on 1 Cor 11:3 - Ive never heard that before, but I don't like it because I think its reading into the verse stuff thats just not there, and mis applying the use of words in that verse also.
I had a Systematic Theology Lecture last night, in which the lecturer was discussing apparently diferrent views on "original sin"
He referred to Adam's sin being imputed to the entire human race, and basically dismissed that. Then he said, "Another view is that Adam was the Federal Head of the human race," he said that idea was based on a dubious interpretation of a text in romans, I didn't write down what he referred to, but I can recall it was somewhere in Romans 5. So he rejected the idea thatAdam was acting federally.
He then went on to promote the view of Pascal on original sin.
I maintain whole heartedly that Adam was acting federally when representing the human race, and that Adams sin was imputed to the entire human race, so I'm not confused about that, but I'm curious to see what people thought he meant when he dismissed the idea in favour of pascal's view. I look up Parcal and see Pascals wager, but nothing on the concept of original sin, and its transmission, and how Adams act affected the human race.
On an unrelated question, earlier in the same lecture he said that the husband and wife relationship was a 'poor reflection' of the relationship between the Father and the Son in the Trinity, and based that concept on 1 Cor 11:3 - Ive never heard that before, but I don't like it because I think its reading into the verse stuff thats just not there, and mis applying the use of words in that verse also.
