8

This quote is often attributed to one of the early church fathers, usually to Bernard of Clairvaux or Saint Augustine, although the earliest reference in print was in 1896. There is no historical evidence that links the quote to Clairvaux or Augustine. It is part of a textbook on human anatomy by Joseph Hyrtl


7

By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice [sic]. And that is why original sin is called &...


7

I'm not sure if you'd include Mormonism as a Christian denomination, but the Mormon church definitely believes this. They believe that people were "Heavenly Father's" spirit children in heaven, who are now in the flesh on earth: Spirit Children of Heavenly Parents.


5

Paul is quite specific as to how sin entered our own sphere of existence : ... by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: [Romans 5:12, KJV.] In this particular place he attributes the entrance of sin, into our own realm, to one man. The text you quote in I Timothy enlarges on that ...


4

There is a complex Christological history behind this question. The common ground is that Jesus Christ is of two natures, divine and human. Christ's divine nature is uncreated and pre-existent, while his human nature is given through the Blessed Virgin Mary. This was then taken in two ways: The theologians of Antioch in Syria emphasized the completeness of ...


3

To my knowledge there are no Christian denominations that teach the pre-existence of humans except (as Daniel Stein has pointed out) the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons). Every denomination apart from them teaches that humans begin to exist at conception (which is technically before birth but I assume the question wasn't about that), and become human at ...


2

It's a problem of translating sarx into English. This article discusses precisely what you are inquiring, arguing why sarx doesn’t ever mean “sinful nature”. Another excellent resource is this book excerpt on "Sin in the theology of Paul" by Tom Holland, author of Romans: The Divine Marriage. It contains a wonderful analysis of the meaning of sarx ...


2

Here is an answer in two parts. The first part deals with information extracted from Book 1 of Calvin’s ‘Institutes’. The link given opens up at Book 3 so you have to navigate back to Book 1. https://reformed.org/master/index.html?mainframe=/books/institutes/books/indxbk3.html CALVIN INSTITUTES - BOOK I. THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD THE CREATOR. Discussion of ...


2

In my research, Dyothelitism (union of the two wills from the two minds of the one Christ) is actually explained by Myaphisitism (union of the two natures, the natures did not become one. The nature were one i.e united/in unity). These two were succinctly the Hypostatic Union. Myaphisitism agrees with Chalcedon that the Lord Jesus Christ is consubstantial ...


2

Questions like this one concerning the incarnation of God really stretch the limits of what we can comprehend. Over the centuries Christians came to settle on terms like "person" or "hypostasis" as the best ways they could think of to explain and reconcile the many truths taught by the scriptures, even though they can't do justice to the full reality of God. ...


2

A The pre-existence of the soul is a cornerstone of all ideas of reincarnation, so all religions that espouse reincarnation believe in it, such as Hinduism, Buddhism, etc. Some religions teach pre-existence but not reincanation. That includes Zoroastrianism, some sects of Judaism, especially those that accept the apocrypha and pseudepigrapha. For example, ...


2

God's word is unchanging; anthropology is not. This article in the Smithsonian Magazine (not known as a hotbed of creationism) says that scientists are rethinking ideas about Naenderthals: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/rethinking-neanderthals-83341003/ Neanderthals were fully human. The differences between Neanderthals and modern humans are ...


1

God's creation of a soul subject to original sin is part of a broader question – why is there evil in God's creation? One aspect of that broad question is that evil is a privation of good. The Catholic Encyclopedia summarizes the thought of St. Thomas Aquinas: Evil, according to St. Thomas, is a privation, or the absence of some good which belongs properly ...


1

It would appear that Calvin did not believe in pre existence of the soul based on the quote below For Calvin, the very idea that the soul “sleeps” until the resurrection made no sense, given the unique properties of the human soul. As a creationist, Calvin affirmed that the human soul is not eternal but is uniquely created by God at the moment of ...


1

I think there is an untrue assumption in this question... My question is simply, where does a new human being's soul come from, since it can't have been created? Energy cannot be created or destroyed is an atheistic philosophical assumption that presumes there is no God with the ability to create energy. Southern Baptists for the most part hold the ...


1

In NT times a father placed his own child under tutors until he reached maturity upon which time he was adopted by his own father and henceforward played a mature role in the family business. Paul is not meaning a process by which a child becomes a member of a family but an event when the child becomes a mature son. The adoption is the 'Son Placing' see ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible